I drank the GUE Fundies Kool-Aid and survived!!

[gypsyjim]

Not going to be loyal to any agency or style. Started Y, done a bit of PADI, and will proudly borrow or steal any technique that seems to work, just to see if it fits me. Intend to try DIR at some point soon myself, not that I am DIW (doing it wrong), just that am all for DIB (doing it better)

 

[ScubaSam]

I can attest to the fact that Sam was the only diver in class using foul language.

The GUE instructors were in shock and couldn't speak let alone swear.

I think student performance had something to do with it.

I couldn't watch myself when holding the camera.

:shocked2: Holy crapola!! Trace!!

You NEVER told me you were on SB, I feel so exposed now.

You have to qualify that I only used "questionable" language the two times you showed up so you are the common dominator in both instants. Just saying...

 

[boulderjohn]

Well, let's hear it from the horse's ... er ... mouth ...

Nowhere in there do I see any mention of agencies ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

What you do see in there is this:

Obvious strokes are not so bad - you can see them and you know to avoid them. Frequently they will give it away with their choice of gear and gear configuration. If you see something that is a complete mess, makes no sense, is less than optimal, or is designed to accommodate some phobia while ignoring all else, you are dealing with a stroke.

I have heard in the (admittedly distant past] people citing this as the reason you do not dive with anyone whose gear is not configured in the accepted DIR fashion (the only one that makes sense), which means about 95% of the divers in the world.

A one-time frequent SB poster who is now gone used to say with some frequency that all alternative air regulators carried in the popular "golden triangle" position always come loose and drag in the silt (apparently even when there is no silt), get fouled or have torn diaphragms, so that they never work when actually needed. Logically, such a diver is a stroke, because that diver cannot not give you air when needed.

I am not saying this is a common statement today, but I have heard it in the past.

 

[ScubaSam]

So am I understanding this correctlly, GI was a SB member who posted often while offended many with his DIR rants on SB and on other sites?? I did a member search and he does not come up.

 

[piikki]

So am I understanding this correctlly, GI was a SB member who posted often while offended many with his DIR rants on SB and on other sites?? I did a member search and he does not come up.

George was before SB. When SB popped up, George probably had to go take a looong rest on the balcony of the asylum to marginally recover

 

[boulderjohn]

So am I understanding this correctlly, GI was a SB member who posted often while offended many with his DIR rants on SB and on other sites?? I did a member search and he does not come up.

George Irvine III, sometimes known as Trey.

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/basic-scuba-discussions/14430-so-just-who-george-irvine-iii.html

I forgot to mention that in another of his messages, he declared that anyone who used 80% oxygen for a deco gas was a stroke.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

:shocked2: Holy crapola!! Trace!!

You NEVER told me you were on SB, I feel so exposed now.

You have to qualify that I only used "questionable" language the two times you showed up so you are the common dominator in both instants. Just saying...

It ain't swearin' if you smile while you're sayin' it ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

What you do see in there is this:

I see a guy saying don't try to solve skills problems with gear. People get too hung up on gear ... that's only a tiny part of what DIR brings to the table. People get all defensive when they think that because DIR promotes a standardized rig that means they believe everything else is inherently unsafe. I don't think that's it at all. There's a big difference between "not optimal" and "unsafe" ... and I think that for the most part, they're talking about optimization.

DIR promotes gear standardization for a lot of good reasons. However, let's be real ... none of those reasons are because they believe their way of doing it is exclusive to diver safety ... and in particular not to every applicable way of diving. As I said earlier, standardized gear makes dive planning and execution easier ... and the more complex the dive, the more important this becomes. On a tropical reef, it really doesn't matter ... the environment is very forgiving, and the gear configuration is standardized toward both the environment and the needs of the diver. Different environments ... different needs. You know as well as I do which environment the DIR agenda derived from. Whether that agenda benefits you depends a great deal on where and how you choose to dive.

At any rate, I don't see the quote you pulled out as saying that non-DIR configurations are, by definition, unsafe. I see it as saying (a) don't solve skills issues with gear ... (b) make configuration choices that are logical and serve a function ... (c) don't load yourself down with a bunch of gear you don't need.

Those tenets are not unique to DIR ... in fact, they existed long before GUE ever coined the term.

I have heard in the (admittedly distant past] people citing this as the reason you do not dive with anyone whose gear is not configured in the accepted DIR fashion (the only one that makes sense), which means about 95% of the divers in the world.

A one-time frequent SB poster who is now gone used to say with some frequency that all alternative air regulators carried in the popular "golden triangle" position always come loose and drag in the silt (apparently even when there is no silt), get fouled or have torn diaphragms, so that they never work when actually needed. Logically, such a diver is a stroke, because that diver cannot not give you air when needed.

I am not saying this is a common statement today, but I have heard it in the past.

Well, you have to take what you hear people citing in the context of who's saying it.

I hear people saying things on ScubaBoard all the time that just make me wonder what in heck they're thinking. I hear people quoting things as PADI standards that don't have any basis whatsoever in what PADI teaches. The internet is full of misinformation and personal opinions. Am I to hold that against the agency?

I don't think so.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

George was before SB. When SB popped up, George probably had to go take a looong rest on the balcony of the asylum to marginally recover

No ... his mommy found out what he was saying on the Internet and took his computer away from him.

We have had our share of GI3 wannabe's on ScubaBoard over the years ... most of them not even remotely DIR ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

George Irvine III, sometimes known as Trey.

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/basic-scuba-discussions/14430-so-just-who-george-irvine-iii.html

I forgot to mention that in another of his messages, he declared that anyone who used 80% oxygen for a deco gas was a stroke.

No .. you got that wrong. He said they were "farm animal stupid".

But why must every DIR discussion get back to his colorful rants? After all, the guy was never a GUE instructor ... and AFAIK, he never claimed to represent the agency.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)