Online arguments are like running your mouth at a press conference. You don't have to answer to anyone. You can spout all of the BS anyone can stand, and few will call you on it. You might not even have to pay the piper.
The internet phenomenon... a magic little comfort zone, where anyone can talk the talk, but never have to walk the walk.
Whilst everyone is entitled to an opinion, the internet is a place where a 25-dive novice can lecture a 6000-dive pro... and probably receive support from other novices to boot.
What I've noticed is that this phenomenon doesn't happen in real life (at least in my experience)... and certainly not at the dive boat or cave site. Because, God forbid, the novice might actually find themselves in the water with the other person and they just 'might' not measure up to their bluster.
I really don't understand the attitudes of some people. But then again, I grew up in the last generation to not have the internet during our childhood. I am quite an opinionated person (
understatement, I know..), but many would be surprised that I do a lot more lurking, learning and reading on the internet than I do speaking. You'll
rarely see me comment in the cave or CCR forums... I have no authority or expertise to comment in those discussions and debates. I'd feel like a complete dick to be arguing on many topics, especially where others have significant experience.
Maybe there is a need for a sort of fundies/essentials for sidemount? A baseline.
I think that's a tendency for approaches that originate from cave (and lesser degree, tech). In my opinion, it's what we see happening with the likes of Bogerts,Martin, Dallas etc... and many others less publicized.
I was really fascinated to watch Steve Martin's videos last year. I'd never been introduced to his teaching... most of what I do, my approaches, were self-originated. But when I saw Steve's videos I saw a near identical solution. Some minor ideas I stole, some minor ideas I didn't think optimal.... but for 99% of it, we arrived at the same point.
I'd guess I am not the only one to see that.
I'm sure that's also true for the American/Floridian/Cold-Water system also... where you have a different cadre of major pioneers who essentially evolve near-identical approaches and solutions.
As Bruce Lee said; "
absorb what is useful and disregard the rest". Eventually, you are left with a core strand... an approach. In most cases, divers of appropriate knowledge, experience and capability will result in the same solution.
Sidemount differs from 'DIR' as there are
two fundamental schools of approach currently developing. This reflects, perhaps, a reality that sidemount does require a specific application depending on environmental factors. The two schools of approach cover the spectrum of need.. and I honestly don't know if either school will 'prevail' over the other, or eventually merge somehow. Somehow, I doubt it.
The 'secret' is that establishing consensus and formalizing of common approaches arises from extremely competent
divers sharing, learning, evaluating and selecting.... not from online zealots and forum debates.
A lot of what you read is people justifying their purchase decision. If they spent money on it, it must be the greatest thing possible. They know relatively little about any other system, but they think it will be vastly inferior to the one they've chosen.
That may be correct. In contrast, the divers who are actually leading the developments get their gear for free, or are designing/manufacturing their own. There's little ego involved, and certainly no need for forum squabbling. If something is defended, it's probably because of commercial reasons, rather than offended egos. For the most part, those involved at the upper echelons have very clear motivation to know exactly what's good and bad in their, and others, systems..
