Scuba
Contributor
A little perspective is due here.
While DandyDon has been agressively seeking answers, speculating and making comments that sometimes do not portray the resort in a positive light, there are also those who have done the opposite. Both approaches have positives and negatives. I think more than a few have commented on DandyDon's comments, so I'll concentrate on the other perspective.
The personal dig was definitely uncalled for. Frustration perhaps. If we continue numerically on your list of opinions or real world truths:
5. Those who will give the benefit of the doubt to the resort.
6. Those who will take every opportunity available to make apologetic remarks in defense of the resort. ..........
RoatanMan, you said we'll likely read the accident details on some ins. co. publication.
I'm genuinely curious. Is this standard operating procedure? On which publications might one find this type of info. Names.
You also add you are confident that DAN will also provide such info when the dust settles.
If I may respectfully say so, I think this shows a bit of naivete on your part as well. Unless there is an ins. claim filed there will be no insurance co. report. If there is no payout? I do not expect an impartial and detailed public release of a private settlement - ever, to be the norm, in terms of accident analysis. DAN accepts voluntary reporting. Parties don't report, accident doesn't exist as far as they're concern. As far as I know they conduct no investigation of their own. They simply report what is reported to them.
Surely its only fitting that people be held accountable for their deeds if we are ever going to get a more factual, truthful accounting from people. It's only fitting they reap the consequences of their words and deeds. Unless you propose we play their game like good little puppets. Maybe not enough time has passed in this case. Being that the statement does not say until investigation is complete, the onus is on them, to follow up withing a reasonable time or reap the repurcussions. I do not know what was said in the deleted posts on their site, but it appears this could have been better handled. You can't expect to release an accident notice in a discussion forum and have no questions from curious members. The lack of an answer to the diver who will soon be visiting them who made an (unknown to us) enquiry understandably compounds a negative reflection as seen by some. Yes, I am rehashing. The intention being to point there are legitimate issues here, not just hot air.
Silence is not neutral. It can be a means of confusion.
Many parties have a vested interest in portraying events to their perceived benefits, Speculation is inevitable in the absence of overwhelming evidence. even then in some cases. Sometimes those most opposed to it, and with the most to loose, unknowingly fuel it. And sometimes it is the best they can hope for. I'm making no judgement in this case, just a general comment on the subject.
Not necessarily. It may very will be the most fruitful or only means of analysis available to some. Those indirectly affected by the accident can gain from any lessons to be learned. Being one myself, I understand the legal and personal considerations of those involved and the reasons they choose to act as they do. But I don't feel compelled to follow in their steps. I need to look out for my interests. Speculation, and pressure on knowledgable parties to release pertinent information, may be the choice of some. This should not be condemned any more than the choice made by some others to contain or prevent the release of information, acting on behalf of their own self interests.
Speculation can certainly get out of hand and become counter productive. We just differ in opinion as to the parties responsible. For me, its both the speculator and the one refusing to release whatever information they have. You can't say one party has the right to discuss events and the other doesn't, unless permitted to by the former. You could say it, we'll just disagree.
Many, or most of these dive accidents end up in the speculative column anyways in terms of contributing factors, exact initial emergency cause, and developing chain of events.
One more thing, a party who feels aggrieved by speculation, is free to counter as they deem fit. Let's not portray them as indefensible victims.
I welcome any comments you wish to make, I have thick skin. I have 10k posts and 1 dive. A full fledged cyber diver, like the rest of you reading this. No need to get personal though. It doesn't substantiate the issues being discussed. And I do like to point out that you make many valid points in your comments. Nothing personal. Just feel you are being a little harsh in your comments and others are jumping in the bandwagon. Just thought I add my biased, hopefully less biased comments.
While DandyDon has been agressively seeking answers, speculating and making comments that sometimes do not portray the resort in a positive light, there are also those who have done the opposite. Both approaches have positives and negatives. I think more than a few have commented on DandyDon's comments, so I'll concentrate on the other perspective.
RoatanMan:
The personal dig was definitely uncalled for. Frustration perhaps. If we continue numerically on your list of opinions or real world truths:
5. Those who will give the benefit of the doubt to the resort.
6. Those who will take every opportunity available to make apologetic remarks in defense of the resort. ..........
RoatanMan, you said we'll likely read the accident details on some ins. co. publication.
I'm genuinely curious. Is this standard operating procedure? On which publications might one find this type of info. Names.
You also add you are confident that DAN will also provide such info when the dust settles.
If I may respectfully say so, I think this shows a bit of naivete on your part as well. Unless there is an ins. claim filed there will be no insurance co. report. If there is no payout? I do not expect an impartial and detailed public release of a private settlement - ever, to be the norm, in terms of accident analysis. DAN accepts voluntary reporting. Parties don't report, accident doesn't exist as far as they're concern. As far as I know they conduct no investigation of their own. They simply report what is reported to them.
Surely its only fitting that people be held accountable for their deeds if we are ever going to get a more factual, truthful accounting from people. It's only fitting they reap the consequences of their words and deeds. Unless you propose we play their game like good little puppets. Maybe not enough time has passed in this case. Being that the statement does not say until investigation is complete, the onus is on them, to follow up withing a reasonable time or reap the repurcussions. I do not know what was said in the deleted posts on their site, but it appears this could have been better handled. You can't expect to release an accident notice in a discussion forum and have no questions from curious members. The lack of an answer to the diver who will soon be visiting them who made an (unknown to us) enquiry understandably compounds a negative reflection as seen by some. Yes, I am rehashing. The intention being to point there are legitimate issues here, not just hot air.
Silence is not neutral. It can be a means of confusion.
Many parties have a vested interest in portraying events to their perceived benefits, Speculation is inevitable in the absence of overwhelming evidence. even then in some cases. Sometimes those most opposed to it, and with the most to loose, unknowingly fuel it. And sometimes it is the best they can hope for. I'm making no judgement in this case, just a general comment on the subject.
Not necessarily. It may very will be the most fruitful or only means of analysis available to some. Those indirectly affected by the accident can gain from any lessons to be learned. Being one myself, I understand the legal and personal considerations of those involved and the reasons they choose to act as they do. But I don't feel compelled to follow in their steps. I need to look out for my interests. Speculation, and pressure on knowledgable parties to release pertinent information, may be the choice of some. This should not be condemned any more than the choice made by some others to contain or prevent the release of information, acting on behalf of their own self interests.
Speculation can certainly get out of hand and become counter productive. We just differ in opinion as to the parties responsible. For me, its both the speculator and the one refusing to release whatever information they have. You can't say one party has the right to discuss events and the other doesn't, unless permitted to by the former. You could say it, we'll just disagree.
Many, or most of these dive accidents end up in the speculative column anyways in terms of contributing factors, exact initial emergency cause, and developing chain of events.
One more thing, a party who feels aggrieved by speculation, is free to counter as they deem fit. Let's not portray them as indefensible victims.
I welcome any comments you wish to make, I have thick skin. I have 10k posts and 1 dive. A full fledged cyber diver, like the rest of you reading this. No need to get personal though. It doesn't substantiate the issues being discussed. And I do like to point out that you make many valid points in your comments. Nothing personal. Just feel you are being a little harsh in your comments and others are jumping in the bandwagon. Just thought I add my biased, hopefully less biased comments.
