It would appear that these requirements are at cross purposes. I have yet to meet the instructor that did not 'promote' their classes. This sets up all instructors to violate the rules and then the same rules require that they violate them anyway. You can't promote the NACD without promoting students to take classes. Talk about a catch 22.
The cave community should have learned its lesson about transparency by now. The practice of suppressing any information, positive or negative, is anathema to promoting safety. The intent might have been noble but the results are horrible. Open and honest discussions here and elsewhere do a lot towards exposing bad practices and bad instructors. Forbidding members to 'disparage' or to 'refrain from making any public content' is Orwellian no matter how you try to justify it. Trying to keep instructors from discussing events and issues via threat of expulsion is a great way to control the spin, but that goes against the whole idea of transparency. It's what SDI/TDI did to Jim Wyatt for expressing his feelings about their efforts to cash in on cave diving. Sure, it works for North Korea, but is that how you want to be viewed? Such draconian responses makes you wonder what they are really trying to hide.
In addition, it fuels the fires of back biting and turf wars in the cave community. How many have expressed that the whole mess brought against Rob Neto is fraught with hearsay and pettiness? The rumor is even circulating that this is a ploy by Larry Green to get to be training chair again. Now you've pissed off Rob to the point that he is simply out of craps to give. He won't respond to these silly allegations because after TWO YEARS, it's obvious that they aren't going to go away in spite of absolutely no evidence. Rob is being rail roaded simply because he won't lower himself to continue to play cave community politics. It's no wonder that he has been bitten by the bitter bug and refuses to play along with the charade. Now, are my comments 'disparaging' or heart felt constructive criticism? There's no way for anyone but me to know my intent. If you're butthurt by the comments, then they are disparaging. If you agree with them, then I'm your cyber hero.
Wow, lots of stuff to quote, but my reply will be pretty short in comparison.
I am a member of two agencies. You used to be a member of one of them, and I believe you may have (or are) a member of the other. Both have a code of ethics which can be summarized as saying don't publicly disparage another member, but if you see another member doing something bad/dangerous/questionable, contact HQ and file a report.
I do not see those ethics policies as a transparency issue. They are there to protect the innocent from some of the back yard brawl mud slinging that can go on when two factions do not get along. "Innocent until proven guilty," if you will.
The second part of my reply is regarding the NACD stance on promoting cave diving for economic gain. I interpret it to read that cave instructors have an obligation to make cave training available to keep someone from hurting their self, but they should not actively recruit people to take up the activity. This is comes from the inherent danger in cave diving -- it is more dangerous than open water diving, and should be respected. But it also comes from the fact that the caves are delicate and fragile systems, and they should be protected and preserved as well.
You and I have debated this before, but I tend to agree with the NACD philosophy on this front, which is one of the reasons my signature has a simple link to my website but no details on the kind of training I offer.
ok, gotta run, I'm teaching this weekend.
---------- Post added May 30th, 2015 at 06:19 AM ----------
When is the cave community going to get out of sixth grade and stop with the endless childishness? Until transparency is embraced by all the agencies, then it's never going to end. Never.
Golden rule of scuba, never hold your breath. I've been cave diving off and on since 1994, the politics and rumors have always been there.