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

[Bob DBF]

Since I am not a fan of change for change sake, I would like to see the A&I kept as is, with these few changes:

1. Make it black. No one can view without opting in, after reading the TOS, with emphasis on understanding it instead of just checking off agree. Maybe one term per page.
2. Have the mods more vigorous in enforcing the TOS. It will keep focus A&I on what it was made for.
3. Three strikes your out. Three violations in X time (say 30 day span) and you are banned from A&I for Y time (say 3 months first offence 6 mo.next)
3a. Possibly one strike your out for condolences and loved ones lashing out at the members, and their posts, in the thread.
4. Automatically set up a condolence thread when the name of the deceased SCUBA diver is known. This will reduce loved ones from A&I because they have somewhere else to go. I would not do this for other types of divers unless they were also known SCUBA divers.
5. I would keep snorkeling, free-diving, ect., accidents in A&I as a lot of us also partake in these sports and there are things to be learned or reinforced there as well.

Making it marginally harder to get in and much harder to stay in when violating the TOS, would leave people in the forum that are interested and trying to learn from the accidents. By not having it available to non members and those members who have not opted in, the disruption to the thread, and more importantly, to the loved ones who are more likely to be enraged, rather than consoled, by the discussion.


Bob
---------------------------------
...will probably be back later in the thread.

 

[Diver0001]

No, this is not true! We have learned how the diver and the gear was found from the recovery divers. That's not hearsay! Then, because of speculation we have learned what possibly could have happened (considering the facts given by the recovery divers). You might not know what actually happened in this case, but you have learned what could have lead to the accident. That's valuable too.

Even if all you have is hearsay, there is still value in speculation, as long as people can recognize it as speculation.

Fair enough. Now we have gotten to the core of the issue, I think. There are definitely differing opinions on how much room for speculation there should be. I think you and I are not very close on that but of course we don't need to agree. If you really boil it down then it seems that the questions Netdoc is asking can be brought down to trying to find a point on this line.

R..

 

[DandyDon]

Why do you post accidents and incidents? (This is especially for you, @DandyDon!)

I have answered this before here, but for the record: Someone needs to bring the news here for discussion, and while I prefer seeing others beat me here with the reports, I do what I can to contribute. If there is any problem, you need to let me know.

 

[Duke Dive Medicine]

For personal and professional reasons I rarely post in this forum, but if people find value in reasonable speculation about a particular incident then I don't see a reason to prohibit it. The threads tend to degenerate into offshoots and rabbit-holes where individuals debate minute details and what-ifs, and there is a point where they lose their benefit IMO, but that point is probably subjective and the threads usually die on their own when the various horses are flogged enough. I am always impressed by the thoughtful consideration that goes into moderating this forum and I don't see a reason to change that at all.

Best regards,
DDM

 

[lowviz]

• Why do you come here?

  The MidAtlantic states are notoriously close-mouthed when it comes to any boat accident, charter or private. I occasionally come here for information (Did I know the diver and how bad was it?).

• Why do you post accidents and incidents?

  I posted "Perforated an eardrum" half to see what would happen and half to warn the newbies. It was personally worthwhile, I took the expected drubbing (even that was fun), but a lot of divers chimed in with their experiences and views.

• WHAT IS OUR MISSION?

  (in your words, please)

  To both inform and offer the community learning opportunities. The big question is WHO gets informed. I completely agree with Bob DBF. Make it "opt-in" and out of sight of the search engines.
  

• Are we meeting your and the community's needs?

  You are meeting most of mine. That is all that I can say.

• What are we missing and why?

  More information, "reliable" rumors, and names. This is the place to pick it all apart if one is interested.

• How can we add that?

  Go "opt-in" and start doing it.

• What needs to be eliminated and why?

  I'll echo what has already been said. Condolences without any substance. There is a place for that.

• How can we be more respectful to friends and survivors?

  By going "opt-in".

• Can we be more respectful without harming our mission?

  Yes.

• Currently, we don't allow names to be used unless released publicly first. Is this fair for the family? Is it fair for us? Is a change needed?

  Yet again, go "opt-in" and put everything out there. Opted-in members only. A person would have to join and then opt-in to get access. Just think of all the new lawyers that would sign up...

 

[oya]

Then, because of speculation we have learned what possibly could have happened (considering the facts given by the recovery divers).

This often depends on who is doing the speculating.

Other than a username, with which you may or may not be familiar, every post is simply somebody out in the cloud. Is that somebody a cave instructor with decades of experience and several body recoveries under their belt? Someone who is right at that 50-dive high where they've got 500 posts about how they know everything about the sport and haven't been humbled yet?

I'd say speculation by the later just causes more confusion and noise. Folks who don't know better should be listening, not offering up opinions on issues about which they know little. But no one is capable of holding their tongue at that point. I know I wasn't.

 

[Storker]

Currently, we don't allow names to be used unless released publicly first. Is this fair for the family? Is it fair for us? Is a change needed?

I'd be very uncomfortable with naming victims before the names are released publicly. Just like - at least over here - the police doesn't release names to the press until the family has been notified.

 

[DevonDiver]

Personally, I don't think Accident Analysis discussions are best suited to the open internet.

I'd suggest such analysis was conducted in a private sphere. Members can opt in and debate under strict guidelines.

A format for discussion would be good. Such formats exist already in other areas of incident critique and analysis. There are members of Scubaboard with expertise in these fields who could establish a framework for analysis and reporting.

The results of such analysis - a final consensus report, could be shared publicly for wider diver educational value. Such reports could keep those involved in the incidents anonymous and focus entirely on the facts of the incident.

 

[lowviz]

...//... The results of such analysis - a final consensus report, could be shared publicly for wider diver educational value. Such reports could keep those involved in the incidents anonymous and focus entirely on the facts of the incident.

IMHO, the ideal situation would be to make only the OP and the consensus report viewable by all SB members. Everything in between would be opt-in and completely hidden. One would have to opt-in to each particular thread of interest, not the forum itself.

 

[Serge Tao]

BSAC has been publishing annual Diving Incident Reports since 2000. The goal/mission:

Please browse through the details in this report and use them to learn from others’ mistakes. They have had the courage and generosity to record their experiences for publication, the least that we can do is to use this information to avoid similar problems.​

Speculation is acceptable when it's about car crashes. But in diving it's all of a sudden difficult to accept speculation. There's a big gray area between speculation and an educated guess. And it certainly does not have to be disrespectful.

Keep the A&I section as it is. I can decide for myself if I can learn from what's posted - either speculation or a presentation of facts. Keeping the lid on the jar will never lead to improvements or prevention. However I do agree that simply copying news articles without any follow-up is not educating.