Philosophy split discussion

[DCBC]

There have been no violations of TOS, so it can be put back in Basic.

Any chance of answering some questions?

Are you telling us that the truth doesn't matter? That it's unfair if negative things, even if true, are said about an agency? Please explain how that fits in with the concept of fair.

Why was the other thread closed?

I agree with Walter. If there was a violation of the terms of service, I fail to see it. It would be beneficial if this could be explained. There certainly seems to be more than one or two people that feel this way. It would seem that some clarification by SB is appropriate.

If the truth is told and it is censored, I believe that it is a restriction of an individual's freedom of speech and expression. It would also seem that it is also contrary to the terms of service of SB; to wit: "Our focus is to advance safety, knowledge and enjoyment within the diving community by encouraging the mutual exchange of experiences, ideas and opinions," Please clarify.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Maybe we need a third split to complain about what a poor decision this was, eh?

I noticed that the last post in the split was mine. Somehow this got interpreted as "trolling" ...

Don't kid yourself ... pools cost money to own and maintain. So even if the shop has its own pool, the cost of owning and maintaining that pool have to be factored into the cost of the course.

The only way to offer an inexpensive course is to either cut corners, or run the course as a loss-leader and hope to make the money back in gear sales.

I already told you I ain't going to get involved in that discussion. Suffice it to say that there is nothing in PADI standards that prevent an instructor from teaching a quality class. There is nothing in the standards that forces them to teach a quality class either ... it really, truly boils down to the choices the individual instructor makes.

I TRULY don't understand why that comment was considered "Whine and Cheeze" material ...

Everything I stated in that post is directly related to dive training, and not a single word of it can possibly ... by a reasonable, rational person ... be construed as slamming anybody.

Personally, I think splitting the thread was one of the poorest, least logical staff decisions I have seen in eight+ years of posting on this board ... I haven't a clue what's allowed to be discussed on ScubaBoard anymore ... but I do find the fact that a moderator would interpret the above comment as a troll to be offensive ... maybe I'm wasting my time here, after all ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Crush]

I found the thread to be incredibly enlightening.

WRT splitting the thread, what recourse is there for the OP? Is there a SB board of governors or dispute-resolution mechanism? What is the documented, pre-established procedure for deciding to split a thread? What accountability, if any, is there? Is a decision voted upon, and reasons for a decision (in this case, post splitting) documented?

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I agree with Walter. If there was a violation of the terms of service, I fail to see it. It would be beneficial if this could be explained. There certainly seems to be more than one or two people that feel this way. It would seem that some clarification by SB is appropriate.

If the truth is told and it is censored, I believe that it is a restriction of an individual's freedom of speech and expression. It would also seem that it is also contrary to the terms of service of SB; to wit: "Our focus is to advance safety, knowledge and enjoyment within the diving community by encouraging the mutual exchange of experiences, ideas and opinions," Please clarify.

Ya know what, Wayne ... I have never bought into this whole "freedom of speech" notion. This isn't a government installation ... it's a business.

But it would help if we could make some rational sense of the logic here ... if there was any.

People invest a bit of themselves into their thoughts on these boards ... at least some do. Seems like those who just decide to come here and post nonsense are given a much more free reign than those who want to put some thought into what they're saying.

What's the logic behind that? I'd really like to know. Because it seems that, in this case, an awful lot of legitimate thoughts were just dismissed by a couple of staff members as garbage, and moved to the trash bin.

I find that really insulting.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DCBC]

I found the thread to be incredibly enlightening.

WRT splitting the thread, what recourse is there for the OP? Is there a SB board of governors or dispute-resolution mechanism? What is the documented, pre-established procedure for deciding to split a thread? What accountability, if any, is there? Is a decision voted upon, and reasons for a decision (in this case, post splitting) documented?

When the thread disappeared without any explanation, I followed SB protocol and appealed the decision to remove it. No one has acknowledged my e-mail and I have been kept in the dark throughout the process.

When another thread was started (split). One of my other posts (which was unrelated to the topic noted) was listed as the OP. I have requested that the Moderator create the OP on the new thread, as it was not my intention to post under the Whine and Cheese category. Again, I have heard is silence.

 

[TechBlue]

I also sent in a query which was not answered. It's a shame that the moderators choose to hide behind Carolyn and not respond.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I have contacted NetDoc directly about this.

I've reviewed what got cut. It boils down to this ... everything pro-PADI was allowed to stay in this thread. Everything refuting pro-PADI positions was removed to the Whine and Cheeze forum ... which is a statement that if you ain't on the PADI bandwagon, your opinion is worthless.

Can you say "Somebody has an agenda?"

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DCBC]

Ya know what, Wayne ... I have never bought into this whole "freedom of speech" notion. This isn't a government installation ... it's a business.

But it would help if we could make some rational sense of the logic here ... if there was any.

People invest a bit of themselves into their thoughts on these boards ... at least some do. Seems like those who just decide to come here and post nonsense are given a much more free reign than those who want to put some thought into what they're saying.

What's the logic behind that? I'd really like to know. Because it seems that, in this case, an awful lot of legitimate thoughts were just dismissed by a couple of staff members as garbage, and moved to the trash bin.

I find that really insulting.

As do I. BTW freedom of speech isn't something reserved for government; this is a public forum. As far as I'm aware, there are only five categories of speech which are unprotected: obscenity, fighting words, fraudulent misrepresentation, advocacy of imminent lawless behavior, and defamation. Unless it's reasonable to itemize a posting under one of these, I don't believe it can be monitored. Perhaps one of the lawyers would like to comment. I'm aware that SB is a business, but it's reasonable to expect that they hold to the principals they holdout within their own terms of service.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

There's the ToS ... but in this case, there were no ToS violations.

Virtually everything I contributed to this thread got tossed in the trash with not a single word of explanation.

I find that incredibly insulting.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I am reproducing here ... in their entirety ... every single post of mine that got tossed into the trash. I want the moderator who made that decision to point out to me what she found objectionable. And if there's a ToS violation in there ANYWHERE, kindly point it out to me.

My observation would be that the majority of people who quit diving within a year of certification do so for one of two reasons ...

1. They found out how expensive it is ... or ...
2. They learned just enough to scare the crap outta themselves

Better dive instruction would have little to no effect on the cost of scuba diving, but it can and does reduce the dropout rate in the second category.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I believe that's called "envy" ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Another fine example of PADI marketing genius. Take a watered-down program and give it the same name ... but not the same meaning ... as something your competitor offers. People then think there's an equivalence, but that they can get the PADI equivalent for a lot less money and effort.

They are, of course, misled ... which is, of course, PADI's intent.

NAUI Scuba Diver = PADI Open Water Diver
PADI Scuba Diver = something quite a bit less than NAUI Scuba Diver

They did the same thing with Master Diver.

NAUI Master Diver = a real course, with some pretty intensive academics and in-water skills work

PADI Master Diver = $50 for an extra C-card once you've taken a bunch of specialty classes

Nice bit of marketing, but it would be more honest if they either chose a different name or offered an equivalent level of training for the product offering.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Walter did just that several years ago and it was published online. PADI sued him. They lost, of course ... but it cost Walter a couple years of time and aggravation to fend them off.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I disagree with the premise ... individual actions are what eventually forces change.

Why wait for someone else to "do what's right" ... it starts with each and every one of us.

I don't "crusade" to change the diving world ... it's sufficient to me to make sure that those I train and mentor learn as I can best help them learn. The agencies ... even the one I belong to ... pursue their agenda for business reasons. I'm not concerned about the business of diving ... I'm concerned about the safety of individual divers. Those two goals are not always in harmony with each other.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I'd prefer to speak for myself, thank you.

I'm not saying "we need better dive training out there" because of ANYTHING that PADI is doing. Frankly, I don't CARE what PADI is doing. My only comment about PADI is that they mislead people by giving their courses the same title as something that their competitors already created at a higher level ... as evidenced by the examples I gave. Misleading your customers is reprehensible, I don't care WHAT product you're offering.

As for what I'M saying, I think I stated it pretty clearly ... I am not trying to change the world. I'm just interested in doing the best I can to influence the divers I can reach in a positive way.

I didn't get into teaching scuba to improve the worldwide state of dive training ... I got into it to help the people who come to me to be better divers.

Can y'all wrap your head around that concept?

Diving isn't a business to me ... it's a passion. I didn't get into it to make money ... I already have a job that pays me pretty well. I got into teaching to help those who WANT my help to become better divers. I'm not interested in changing the state of dive instruction ... I'm only interested in changing individuals ... and ONLY those who choose to accept the help I can give them.

So please ... PLEASE ... stop speaking for me. Because, frankly, you aren't doing a very good job of it.


Dude, I think it's YOU who has the reading comprehension problem. I don't waste my time whining about PADI on the Internet. That's a complete waste of time because they not only don't care what I have to say ... they don't even care what their own instructors have to say. Their business model works for them ... that's all they worry about.

So no ... I don't whine about PADI. I haven't been, as you say, "doing it for years" ... I haven't been doing it at all.

And I think I HAVE changed some things in diving ... for those divers who are interested in the changes I can help them make. That is really all I care to do.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

No ... providing quality education costs more. That's why so many shops don't do it. If you want the big classes, you can't offer a quality class ... because people won't buy it. They see you offering an OW class for $375, and they see your competitor offering a class with the same title for $129 ... which one do you think they're going to take?

They won't ask why your class costs three times as much ... or even if they do ... even if you explain it to them ... it won't really mean anything. They won't care that you offer more pool time ... which is expensive ... or additional class instruction ... which is more in-depth ... or that you use higher-quality gear that you make sure fits your students properly. None of that will mean anything to them. What means something to them is the cost, the time investment, and the name on the C-card when it's all over.

It won't be until they get frightened or frustrated underwater after the class is over that they'll look back and wish they had considered the more expensive option ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Quite so ... there are perhaps 8 or 9 instructors in the Seattle area who I will refer potential students to. They pretty well cover the gamut of agencies ... NAUI, PADI, SSI, SDI/TDI, and UTD. The one thing they all have in common is that they turn out quality divers.

It ain't the agency that does that ... it's the instructor who has both the chops and the desire to teach people how to dive properly ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Don't kid yourself ... pools cost money to own and maintain. So even if the shop has its own pool, the cost of owning and maintaining that pool have to be factored into the cost of the course.

The only way to offer an inexpensive course is to either cut corners, or run the course as a loss-leader and hope to make the money back in gear sales.



I already told you I ain't going to get involved in that discussion. Suffice it to say that there is nothing in PADI standards that prevent an instructor from teaching a quality class. There is nothing in the standards that forces them to teach a quality class either ... it really, truly boils down to the choices the individual instructor makes.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)