Input on our Accident and Incidents Forum... What do you want? How do you want it?

[boulderjohn]

I would like to comment on the various thoughts surrounding any limitations on posts related to whether or not the person posting was a witness to the event. The thinking is that if you have a witness, you have a more reliable account. In actuality, the opposite might be true.

In the thread about the Cozumel accident that eventually killed dive shop owner Opal Cohen, the first witness account of the incident was a flat out lie designed to hide the true events and make them less damning of the individuals involved. That can happen all too often--a witness was enough of a participant to have a reason to tell something other than the truth.

I am part of the team that writes accident reports for the National Speleological Society. A couple years ago I was interviewing people about such an incident, and I got two directly opposite accounts of a critical moment in the incident. There was no doubt in my mind that one person was lying for personal reasons, but I had no basis for that other than my gut feeling. The team discussed what to do, and we decided that the only thing we could do was leave that part of the story out, as if it never happened. That is what we did. Unfortunately, the contention of the person who I was sure was lying was that nothing happened, so we in effect supported his side of the story.

I did another investigation in which I was also absolutely positive that at least one and possibly two people were flat out lying. Of course, once again no proof was possible, so the report had nothing to indicate that whatsoever.

That is actually a reason that an A & I thread can have an advantage over official reports like we do and as DAN does. Take the Cozumel story for example. The initial lie in that story held sway for several days before probing questions from posters pointed out inconsistencies, created doubts, and eventually led to the exposure of the truth and a full confession.

 

[lowviz]

...//... Don't even think of publishing the alleged name of a dead person before it's publicly released. ...

I, too, agree completely.

However, "publish" is the key word here. Let's look at naming names and taking guesses. Is such loose speculation permitted in the Pub?

I would like to express my personal thanks to both Ken Kurtis and boulderjohn for offering very rare, most insightful, and most professional viewpoints. Such allows me to see the greater picture. I remain particularly amused by a volunteer consensus. Yes, it would be valuable as a synopsis, but this being ScubaBoard, I would love to watch the process of drafting a consensus. No dis to the person who suggested it, but I imagine that such an effort would be totally unworkable.

So, I now have the audacity to suggest:

When creating a thread in the A&I forum, the OP is given a forced choice. "Post for Private Discussion" or "Post for Open Discussion". The "open discussion" option would be the same as it is now. "Private" would only show the OP so that others could determine if they are interested enough to opt-in to that thread. Once opted-in, "Pub Rules" prevail.

 

[boulderjohn]

In my mind, the most troublesome rule in the A&I forum, the one that needs the most thought and clarification, is the "no blamestorming" rule. Years ago I did not understand it, and we had quite a discussion about it in the moderator discussion area. The person who is in charge of this forum explained it in great detail. It is a holdover from his days with accident analysis in the Navy. I think I understand the rule now, but it is very hard to explain, and there can be a HUGE gray area in a thread. There is nothing I hate more as a moderator than having to deal with that, because the people who are doing it usually see nothing wrong with what they are writing and do not understand why they are being moderated. Since I didn't understand it myself at one point, required significant help to get it, and am not really sure I understand it now, I can't blame them. The only real moderating I have done in the last few months was an A & I thread that was a blamestorming festival from the first post, and, once again, people got all over me for supposedly excessive moderation.

 

[lowviz]

...//... "no blamestorming" rule. ...

That would make a great thread. And if you start it, you are off the hook.

 

[DandyDon]

I used to think that DD didn't have a life and spent all day searching for this stuff.

Well, my life is not as exciting as it used to be, but I haven't had to post bail in years. As far as how I find the news stories, Google & Google Alerts does most of that for me.

 

[MMM]

That would make a great thread. And if you start it, you are off the hook.

Well, there IS a sticky in this forum on that very topic...Mishap analysis & "Blamestorming"

 

[lowviz]

Well, yeah. I could act like I knew it was there, but the personal dialog could be quite interesting...

 

[CuzzA]

Well, there IS a sticky in this forum on that very topic...Mishap analysis & "Blamestorming"

See post #66.

 

[Johnoly]

... As far as how I find the news stories......,.

I know it takes time to do, but KEEP POSTING !!,,,, Diver's are reading, learning, and improving.

 

[The Chairman]

Question for you, @NetDoc: as a matter of moderation policy, do good-faith reports negatively affect a user's standing among moderators? Some forum software maintains a count of reports by user, and some mods on some other sites may consider a user troublesome when the count becomes large.

No. Never. At least I can't remember anyone reporting posts that upset the mods. There have been a few POV warriors that often appealed to mods to set the "record straight." They were pretty funny in that regard and their constant squabbling didn't win them any friends. Mods do not vet facts. Go ahead and tell us that white is black. If you're nice about it, we'll let you post all day: unless you become a POV warrior and get stupid with it.

I used to think that DD didn't have a life

Do any of us??? It's my theory that he has these things set to come up on a daily Google advisory. Hell, @DandyDon gave me the heads up about being sued by she who shall not be named! That was invaluable and I was able to get my ducks in a row before I accepted any paper.

I learn more from SB reports than DAN reports.

I hear this a lot from Joe diver... not so much from instructors and even less from those who seem to think of themselves as 'uber instructors'. Dive shops and instructors used to have a monopoly on information. You either had to buy it (gear and classes) or earn it some other way. SubaBoard has ruined that for them and I understand their concern. They've essentially had a revenue stream pulled out from under them. Some have taken the initiative and learned how to use the interwebs but some are mired in their own bitterness about what was and what should be.