Doing it Ridiculous

[TheRedHead]

could[/B] be mainstream. Nine out of every 10 c-cards could say "GUE" instead of "PADI."

And most importantly, recreational dive safety would have been revolutionized.

DIR is a brilliant concept as it is applied to scuba. Simply brilliant, I think. But its marketing (or lack thereof) could use some improvement to help gain more widespread acceptance. A name change might be just one of the many possibilities in that direction.

First of all, many of the concepts of DIR existed before it was codified into an ideology. The same concepts are used by many other technical divers.

I would suggest reading the GUE fundies book and you will see that it is more than just diving. You basically have to agree to a standard of behavior. Do you really expect your average diver to make a pledge like a Boy Scout? They want to dive as a sport, a hobby. DIR has many clannish, tribal elements to it that I find interesting, but I fundamentally do not agree with the necessity of many of the principles for recreational diving.

 

[Randy43068]

I am a Marine working for Marine pilots.:05: It's all Naval aviation, the Marines are just the men's department.

This one was kinda slow burn for me. It took a moment or two for it to sink in..
Pretty funny!!

 

[boomx5]

This one was kinda slow burn for me. It took a moment or two for it to sink in..
Pretty funny!!

I didn't see that post, but that is seriously funny. :lol:

 

[onfloat]

Now what was that about attitude???

 

[Derek S]

I would suggest reading the GUE fundies book and you will see that it is more than just diving. You basically have to agree to a standard of behavior. Do you really expect your average diver to make a pledge like a Boy Scout? They want to dive as a sport, a hobby. DIR has many clannish, tribal elements to it that I find interesting, but I fundamentally do not agree with the necessity of many of the principles for recreational diving.

Redhat -

I have to admit that I agree with your "not taking things at face value (especially religion - another thread entirely though )", but GUE's methodologies just make sense from top to bottom for me. Maybe it's because I'm a veteran. Maybe it's because I really like black, maybe it's because I got sick of forking over cash for classes that had little if any substantive value.

It is true that GUE solidified the system (like Lamont, I too am sick of the animosity the DIR moniker has created) and that it is much more than just diving. Is agreeing to a standard of behavior such a bad thing?

- No smoking
- No drugs
- No alcohol (on night before or on dive day)
- Attempt a modicum of baseline fitness
- Have standardized gear configuration (not brand specific)
- Dive with a safe attitude and place team ethos and situational awareness at the highest priority

Those things all seem MORE than reasonable to me. I understand that PADI/NAUI/SSI/PDIC has helped bring SCUBA to the masses, but the business side of things has taken over. I've seen people certified who have NO BUSINESS being in the water, GUE philosophies or not.

Having been left on a dive by not one, but two insta-buddies while I fixed the float line that one of them messed up, I'm sorry if I get a smidge touchy when situational awareness is brought up.

I know that there are great divers who are not GUE trained, and have never considered any of the classes. My current regular buddy is a NAUI Tech trained diver, and I trust him with my life. That being said, I would like nothing more if he would consider taking the Fundies class with me. Time will tell how it plays out.

Ultimately, the way I look at it is this. If you like what GUE is saying, listen, if not, change the channel.

 

[joeabroad]

Great thread everyone--very entertaining.

So which one of these great, friendly guys invented the term "strokes," anyway?

 

[TCDiver1]

Ultimately, the way I look at it is this. If you like what GUE is saying, listen, if not, change the channel.

Ya know Derek, that channel flipper works in both directions.

 

[TheRedHead]

Redhat -

I have to admit that I agree with your "not taking things at face value (especially religion - another thread entirely though )", but GUE's methodologies just make sense from top to bottom for me. Maybe it's because I'm a veteran. Maybe it's because I really like black, maybe it's because I got sick of forking over cash for classes that had little if any substantive value.

Making sense to you is one thing, my operative word is necessary. If you are going to create a new standard for rec diving, then each principle must be necessary for rec diving.

It is true that GUE solidified the system (like Lamont, I too am sick of the animosity the DIR moniker has created) and that it is much more than just diving. Is agreeing to a standard of behavior such a bad thing?

It's a very, very bad thing in my opinion to require a certain behavior. To encourage it, yes. To require it, no. If you voluntarily wish to ascribe to the philosophy, then there is certainly no harm done. If you make it a prerequisite to engaging in a sport, then you are infringing on people's rights to behave in whatever fashion they wish.

I could go over point by point of my disagreements, but I don't really see any need to. I've thought each one out. I agree with some DIR principles and some I don't agree with. I have no qualms about using things I do agree with and discarding things I don't agree with.

Ultimately, the way I look at it is this. If you like what GUE is saying, listen, if not, change the channel.

You're forgetting this was in response to someone suggesting that GUE should displace, rather than augment, traditional scuba training. If that were to happen, then you wouldn't be able to change the channel.

 

[Randy43068]

Now what was that about attitude???

 

[Randy43068]

then you'll have a baseline for your criticisms.

Making sense to you is one thing, my operative word is necessary. If you are going to create a new standard for rec diving, then each principle must be necessary for rec diving.



It's a very, very bad thing in my opinion to require a certain behavior. To encourage it, yes. To require it, no. If you voluntarily wish to ascribe to the philosophy, then there is certainly no harm done. If you make it a prerequisite to engaging in a sport, then you are infringing on people's rights to behave in whatever fashion they wish.

I could go over point by point of my disagreements, but I don't really see any need to. I've thought each one out. I agree with some DIR principles and some I don't agree with. I have no qualms about using things I do agree with and discarding things I don't agree with.



You're forgetting this was in response to someone suggesting that GUE should displace, rather than augment, traditional scuba training. If that were to happen, then you wouldn't be able to change the channel.