No Joke

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

During the debrief, he replied, "You asked me what deco. I told you 7 and 3 which was YOUR deco. I knew mine." LOL! Cough ... cough ... bulls**t ... cough. :p

So he passed the "Plausible excuses why I screwed up" module? Thats the one thats compulsory for all instructors and Formula 1 drivers...
 
The captain has a higher duty to the ethical/safe operation of a dive boat than to attempt amateur psychotherapy, and this rogue is not a 1st time offender, but a repeat offender banned from other boats, with deep seated cultural/mental differences incompatible with scuba. When a person has been kicked off/banned from other dive boats for rogue behavior outside any acceptable norms (at least in our society), what makes you think the light bulb is suddenly going to go off under this particular captain ? And does this captain have the right to gamble with innocent victims lives during the rogue's learning curve ?

One of our frequent posters has a Ph.D. in psychology. I doubt even a qualified psychologist could make a medical diagnosis from this thread.
 
There's a lot of "If he did that to me, I would have...." posts. While these are all perfectly valid feelings, I would like to add some thoughts which may help to figure what may be the best course of action if and when you do actually end up in this situation:

  • If the person does not realise the implications of what they have done, then going nuclear on them may prevent them from doing it again but it doesn't seem fair to me. The failure is not on their side IF they genuinely don't realise the consequences. This, to me, would be a failure on the part of those responsible for training the individual.
  • The fact that this person has been banned summarily from other boats indicates that they have still not really understood what they are doing. Since banning hasn't worked, maybe a different approach is in order. I would always prefer a course of action that results in one more "good diver" than one fewer "bad diver".
Of course there will always be those who are unable/unwilling to learn and if thats the case then they should be banned, but only after a genuine effort has been made to correct them. Unfortunately that takes time and effort and care, which may not be available from every captain and instructor and "victim".

I am glad that, in this case, those resources were available and deployed freely and generously.
 
One of our frequent posters has a Ph.D. in psychology. I doubt even a qualified psychologist could make a medical diagnosis from this thread.

I fear, sooner or later, this rogue diver will hurt/kill another diver or get hurt/killed himself, and during the subsequent legal discovery process I'm just glad I won't be someone who has to explain or defend why I helped to cover up/excuse/enable the incident/accident, or have to live with the family grief/loss I enabled. I'm betting this individual isn't someone you'd trust your life to while cave diving either.
 
I don't know why he was banned from one boat, but he was banned from our shop/charter over a financial dispute with my boss when rental gear was returned damaged. The owner decided dealing with him wasn't worth the money. You are assuming the ban was safety related and not pain in the @$$ related.
 
There's a lot of "If he did that to me, I would have...." posts. While these are all perfectly valid feelings, I would like to add some thoughts which may help to figure what may be the best course of action if and when you do actually end up in this situation:

  • If the person does not realise the implications of what they have done, then going nuclear on them may prevent them from doing it again but it doesn't seem fair to me. The failure is not on their side IF they genuinely don't realise the consequences. This, to me, would be a failure on the part of those responsible for training the individual.
  • The fact that this person has been banned summarily from other boats indicates that they have still not really understood what they are doing. Since banning hasn't worked, maybe a different approach is in order. I would always prefer a course of action that results in one more "good diver" than one fewer "bad diver".
Of course there will always be those who are unable/unwilling to learn and if thats the case then they should be banned, but only after a genuine effort has been made to correct them. Unfortunately that takes time and effort and care, which may not be available from every captain and instructor and "victim".

I am glad that, in this case, those resources were available and deployed freely and generously.

Banning HAS worked, THOSE boats are now safe from the rogue, those boats are no longer vectors for the disease.
 
Banning HAS worked, THOSE boats are now safe from the rogue, those boats are no longer vectors for the disease.

Quarantining the sufferer may work but I prefer treating the illness. Each to their own, like I said these are all valid feelings but there are several ways to deal with this. Those involved need to decide what to pursue.

Also, if you ban someone from 99 boats, someone may still get hurt on the 100th boat. By fixing the individual, ALL boats are now safe from this person. Granted, not all efforts may be successful but I am willing to try, and it seems Trace and his friend are of the same opinion.
 
I don't know why he was banned from one boat, but he was banned from our shop/charter over a financial dispute with my boss when rental gear was returned damaged. The owner decided dealing with him wasn't worth the money. You are assuming the ban was safety related and not pain in the @$$ related.

I think there was the implication the bans were related to the unsafe behavior, otherwise why even mention the other bans if they don't relate to the issue you experienced ? Now that we're on page 10 of this thread is it clarified to have been a ban based on financial matters. Never the less, revealing banning for multiple different reasons really doesn't make things better, he's a problem child on multiple dimensions ! In emergency medical triage he would be cast off as beyond saving, not worth the trouble, and just siphoning off resources better used on other folks.
 
@Superlyte27

Pete, next time I even think about posting something. Beat the sh*t out of me. I'll thank you.

No, Trace.

I for one am glad you posted. There will always be differences of opinion, it's only through discussions like these that those who are undecided can crystallise their feelings and figure out how they would like to act going forward.

The Internet is a bell curve with extreme views on every side. There are 99 posts on here now and 2500+ views. Like with most threads here, the benefit is not for the majority of posters but the silent majority of viewers who are learning.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom