Let's see. He was born in the 16th c. and died in the 17th. So that narrows it down to NAUI or YMCA.But which agency did he certify with? And did he use split fins?
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
Let's see. He was born in the 16th c. and died in the 17th. So that narrows it down to NAUI or YMCA.But which agency did he certify with? And did he use split fins?
Oh dear, you didn't mention the LA County guys ? Blasphemy! Someone will come soon with a 2 hour post to explain.Let's see. He was born in the 16th c. and died in the 17th. So that narrows it down to NAUI or YMCA.
Read: and thus elderly care was guaranteed for them"Anne More kept producing children"
I was setting it up for @scubadada .Oh dear, you didn't mention the LA County guys ? Blasphemy! Someone will come soon with a 2 hour post to explain.
Would it be manxplain or oldxplain? Not up to date on the latest terms.
I think God and the Constitution ought to sit this one out. Here in Puerto Rico it is very common to see boat anchors and fins alike damaging the reef. We do our best to educate people and remind divers to keep on off the reef with fins. The boaters are truly a lost cause with very little sympathy for what we have to say.You hear "Dive and Let Dive" (or something similar) on ScubaBoard a lot; it is often used to try and close out a bicker-fest where it means something like, "You Do You and I'll Do Me." But it also means "You can dive any way you want and I won't care or say anything." I do not agree with these connotations, and thus disagree with the basic D&LD statement.
As a diving community, we do NOT want people diving dangerously, or in a way that is harmful to the environment. That kind of diving is NOT acceptable! Sure, the diver who is choosing to dive (for example) solo (ADDED LATER FOR CLARITY: but is un trained and/or unequipped for it), or in a buddy pair but refusing to have an alternate 2nd stage, or not mindful of NDLs or their SPG, or deeper than their MOD.... that diver MAY be endangering just themselves, but it might also be endangering their buddy, or those around them should they have (for example) an OOA issue. The diving photographer who "just wants decent picture of the seahorse" but is willing to damage a gorgonian to do it...that is not acceptable. Even the
You hear "Dive and Let Dive" (or something similar) on ScubaBoard a lot; it is often used to try and close out a bicker-fest where it means something like, "You Do You and I'll Do Me." But it also means "You can dive any way you want and I won't care or say anything." I do not agree with these connotations, and thus disagree with the basic D&LD statement.
As a diving community, we do NOT want people diving dangerously, or in a way that is harmful to the environment. That kind of diving is NOT acceptable! Sure, the diver who is choosing to dive (for example) solo (ADDED LATER FOR CLARITY: but is un trained and/or unequipped for it), or in a buddy pair but refusing to have an alternate 2nd stage, or not mindful of NDLs or their SPG, or deeper than their MOD.... that diver MAY be endangering just themselves, but it might also be endangering their buddy, or those around them should they have (for example) an OOA issue. The diving photographer who "just wants decent picture of the seahorse" but is willing to damage a gorgonian to do it...that is not acceptable. Even the lone diver who goes off solo and kills himself...that reflects back on the community, the regulations about where and how we dive, insurance costs, etc.
In the world of conflict resolution, there are three main modes of response to a conflict (as might be caused by seeing someone, for example, tickling a pufferfish to see it blow up): aggressive, analytical, and withdrawal. We each tend to one of those behaviors, but if that behavior does not resolve the conflict, then we tend to go to our second-choice mode, and then finally our last choice mode. Our internal goal when choosing these behaviors and in moving between them is (primary mode) salvaging the issue and the ego of both parties; then dropping back to salvaging the issue and just our ego, and then finally salvaging just our own ego.
An example of example of this sequence is seeing that photographer destroying the environment to get the picture. The assertive response might be to swim over and move the diver away from the gorgonian, while waggling your finger at them with the No-No sign; they respond aggressively (because now they are in conflict too and that is their primary mode too!); you shift to the analytical/provide-information mode and point to their fins and the gorgonians; they stay aggressive (because it is working for them) and give you the finger; you shift to withdrawal, mumble "Dive and Let Dive" into your reg and swim away. Not your problem anymore. Really?
How can we do better? Do we need a handsign (not the finger) for "You are destroying the environment"? The easy answer is, it's not my job; the DM on the boat is getting paid to protect the environment. But, in reality, they WON"T be paid (with a tip) if they call out any divers for unacceptable behavior.
Why is this not everybody's job?
Many of you will attack me and this post for being a busybody and interfering in their "God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed" right to freedom to do whatever they want. Damn straight I am. Suck it up, get over it, and tell me why D&LD is the right answer to dangerous/damaging diving.
lone diver who goes off solo and kills himself...that reflects back on the community, the regulations about where and how we dive, insurance costs, etc.
In the world of conflict resolution, there are three main modes of response to a conflict (as might be caused by seeing someone, for example, tickling a pufferfish to see it blow up): aggressive, analytical, and withdrawal. We each tend to one of those behaviors, but if that behavior does not resolve the conflict, then we tend to go to our second-choice mode, and then finally our last choice mode. Our internal goal when choosing these behaviors and in moving between them is (primary mode) salvaging the issue and the ego of both parties; then dropping back to salvaging the issue and just our ego, and then finally salvaging just our own ego.
An example of example of this sequence is seeing that photographer destroying the environment to get the picture. The assertive response might be to swim over and move the diver away from the gorgonian, while waggling your finger at them with the No-No sign; they respond aggressively (because now they are in conflict too and that is their primary mode too!); you shift to the analytical/provide-information mode and point to their fins and the gorgonians; they stay aggressive (because it is working for them) and give you the finger; you shift to withdrawal, mumble "Dive and Let Dive" into your reg and swim away. Not your problem anymore. Really?
How can we do better? Do we need a handsign (not the finger) for "You are destroying the environment"? The easy answer is, it's not my job; the DM on the boat is getting paid to protect the environment. But, in reality, they WON"T be paid (with a tip) if they call out any divers for unacceptable behavior.
Why is this not everybody's job?
Many of you will attack me and this post for being a busybody and interfering in their "God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed" right to freedom to do whatever they want. Damn straight I am. Suck it up, get over it, and tell me why D&LD is the right answer to dangerous/damaging diving.