Is this setup DIR?

[MHK]

My primary goal was not to make the system DIR,

However, I am considering taking the DIR/F class at some point within the next year or so, because based on what I have read DIR seems to make a lot of sense to me

Thanks. I would be grateful for any feedback, either in that thread or here.

In all honesty, this post is best left in the other forum. This is a DIR forum wherein we provide DIR solutions to questions, we do not provide ad hoc band aids to a piecemeal approach wherein the "primary goal" is NOT to be DIR..

I'm not meaning to flame you, nor do I mean to be dismissive, but the DIR solution is one of a holostic approach and a holostic mindset and those of us that believe in the DIR system, and those of us that teach the DIR system are well served by avoiding discussions that attempt to bifrucate the approach, and appear willing to accept anything but an optimal approach. I guess I'm confused when you suggest that "DIR makes a lot of sense to you", but then ask a question stipulating to the fact that your "primary goal" is to design a system that is "NOT" DIR. It's an inconsistent premise that is best left for other forums.

Regards,

 

[GreenDiverDown]

Hi Michael,
I think that when Sami put together his equipment list he wasn't thinking about DIR at the time. But now he is considering the DIR approach and is planning to attend a DIR-F. I think that he came here to ask if his equipment list looked OK. I think that Sami was just asking if he was getting the right stuff...

I suspect that Sami's wording... "My primary goal was not to make the system DIR"... was not what he meant to say at all.

 

[xiSkiGuy]

Hi Michael,
I think that when Sami put together his equipment list he wasn't thinking about DIR at the time. But now he is considering the DIR approach and is planning to attend a DIR-F. I think that he came here to ask if his equipment list looked OK. I think that Sami was just asking if he was getting the right stuff...

I suspect that Sami's wording... "My primary goal was not to make the system DIR"... was not what he meant to say at all.

I suspect he meant to say "Making the system DIR was not my primary goal"

 

[Xanthro]

In all honesty, this post is best left in the other forum. This is a DIR forum wherein we provide DIR solutions to questions, we do not provide ad hoc band aids to a piecemeal approach wherein the "primary goal" is NOT to be DIR..

I'm not meaning to flame you, nor do I mean to be dismissive, but the DIR solution is one of a holostic approach and a holostic mindset and those of us that believe in the DIR system, and those of us that teach the DIR system are well served by avoiding discussions that attempt to bifrucate the approach, and appear willing to accept anything but an optimal approach. I guess I'm confused when you suggest that "DIR makes a lot of sense to you", but then ask a question stipulating to the fact that your "primary goal" is to design a system that is "NOT" DIR. It's an inconsistent premise that is best left for other forums.

Regards,

In all honesty, it's answers like this that give DIR a BAD reputation. Seriously, the only thing wrong with DIR is the unexcusable attitude displayed by a minority of adherents.

Here, a person is simply buying some gear because he has the opportunity to make a purchase at a reduced rate. He thinks the future would hold a DIR-F course and quite possibly DIR in its totality.

He did not say he didn't want to be DIR. In fact, he said the opposite. The only reason for the whole phrase, "not my primary goal" is because DIR wasn't his first thought on the matter. Now that he's reflecting upon the gear, he wants to ensure that it meets DIR standards. There is NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS.

Really, some DIR people are like a bad LDS, if you don't do everything with us, don't do anything with us.

BTW, how could you, and I assume you are a rational person, write your sentence without knowing that you are flaming and being dismissive, anymore than when I'm writing right now that I'm letting my anger show far more than is usual? You couldn't.

You knew you were being dismissive, and it is this that I take offense to.

If someone has a DIR related question, the logical place to ask is the DIR forum. If you don't like how the person has asked the question hold your tongue. What you should especially not do is what you did and take the person's question out of context.

He NEVER said his primary goal was to not be DIR. He said his primary goal in this equipment purchase was not DIR directed. His post was clear that he has read about DIR, likes the philosphy and wants to ensure this is a good purchase with future DIR training in mind.

 

[TSandM]

The original post was misphrased and clearly later misread. MHK's posts are generally very rational and contain good information, so I'd give him the benefit of the doubt that he thought perhaps somebody was sort of trolling.

 

[Xanthro]

My primary goal was not to make the system DIR

the "primary goal" is NOT to be DIR..

Exactly, how does one get from the first sentence to the second? They have very very different meanings.

Sami's statement is simply that DIR was not the primary goal, it could be the secondary goal, but the sentence in no ways means the the primary goal is to NOT be DIR.

 

[GreenDiverDown]

In Michael's defense, I truely believe that he did not mean to put anyone down. I guess his post could be read that way, but if you know Michael or have read his posts in the past you would realize that he's a pretty good guy and typically very fair and level-headed.

I think that this is one of those "internet" moments... when we misunderstand what the other person is trying to say. Sami's post could easily have been read as MHK read it. Michael was simply pointing out that it's not a good idea to try to take bits and pieces from the DIR approach. I am positive that he didn't mean to slam Sami.

 

[GreenDiverDown]

Exactly, how does one get from the first sentence to the second? They have very very different meanings.

Sami's statement is simply that DIR was not the primary goal, it could be the secondary goal, but the sentence in no ways means the the primary goal is to NOT be DIR.

We must really be bored tonight to be arguing over this but...

"My primary goal was not to make the system DIR"... could easily be read as... "My primary goal was 'to not' make the system DIR."

Trust me... Michael didn't mean to go off on anyone!

 

[Xanthro]

In Michael's defense, I truely believe that he did not mean to put anyone down. I guess his post could be read that way, but if you know Michael or have read his posts in the past you would realize that he's a pretty good guy and typically very fair and level-headed.

I think that this is one of those "internet" moments... when we misunderstand what the other person is trying to say. Sami's post could easily have been read as MHK read it. Michael was simply pointing out that it's not a good idea to try to take bits and pieces from the DIR approach. I am positive that he didn't mean to slam Sami.

Ok, both you and TSandM have said the same thing, and I'll take your word for it. I don't spend tons of time in the DIR forum, and I don't know all the regular posters here that well.

Misunderstandings happen all the time. I apologize to MHK for my outburst. I should have researched him more before I posted.

 

[GreenDiverDown]

No problemo!