Suggestion Splitting the BCD Forum

[Jarrett]

The BCD section has become consumed with discussion about BP/W's. It is to the point that you can't get advice on non BP/W questions there anymore. Any request for information about non-BP/W BCDs is met with 10 responses of "you should get a BP/W."

Most of the non-BP/W users have quit posting in that forum due to the beating that they take when they mention anything but a BP/W. While the BP/W may be a great option for some, the majority of divers out there are not in BP/W setups and still need advice there as well.

My suggestion is to split this forum.

How about subsections like:

Traditional BCDs (Jacket/Back-inflate)
Backplates & Wings

That way posters interested in each could inquire and receive non combative discussions on each type of platform. I believe this would also bring more traditional BCD owners back to the forum for discussions who may otherwise be reluctant to post these days due to the current bias.

 

[cerich]

I'd hate to see it split. A BP/Wing is merely one type of BC. It doesn't deserve its own forum.

But every BCD post becomes a "get a BP/Wing", in fact it's obvious that BCD's aren't discussed as much any more because every post turns the same way.

 

[H2Andy]

I'd hate to see it split. A BP/Wing is merely one type of BC. It doesn't deserve its own forum.

yup

why the desire to segregate BP/Wings from the general scuba population?

i wouldn't have found out about BP/wings if during a discussion about BCD's someone hadn't mentioned BP/Wings (yes, right here on Scubaboard).

But every BCD post becomes a "get a BP/Wing"

that's not quite true.

BP/Wings are *mentioned* in almost every BCD thread, but not in the context of "get a BP/Wing." rather, since BP/Wings are also BCD's, they are offered as another possibility.

again, i fear this segregation of BP/wings from the general population

anyway, that's my .02 cents, and i trust the powers that be will make the best decision for ScubaBoard

 

[divad]

But every BCD post becomes a "get a BP/Wing", in fact it's obvious that BCD's aren't discussed as much any more because every post turns the same way.
__________________
Quote from cerich.





Sophistry.

 

[H2Andy]

right, but since a BP/Wings IS a BCD, the thread is on topic, and this is useful information.

why de-facto eliminate one of many possible responses?

i'd just be weary of limiting what people can respond with to a question when the response is clearly on topic

this division of BP/wings from BCD's is artificial. they're all just different styles of a bouyancy device.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

Splitting the forum will simply generate two forums where backplates/wings and BCDs are debated.

Like pony bottles, spare air, computers, noisemakers, PADI versus everyone else, etc. there will always be a certain number of morbidly repetitive subjects, each with its own permanent debate.

The best you can hope for is to have the debates become more refined and reasoned over time, so that the advantages and disadvantages of each option are more broadly understood by the participants. The alternative is to have each side's true believers continue to argue with one another on the level of "nyah, you're another" and "so's your old man!". Is that too much to hope for? Yeah, probably.....

But if you take a one-ring circus and split it into two rings, it's still going to be a circus.

IMHO...

 

[cerich]

right, but since a BP/Wings IS a BCD, the thread is on topic, and this is useful information.

why de-facto eliminate one of many possible responses?

How about a sticky at the top of the Traditional BCD section (if we do it) that says along the lines of

ALSO consider a Back Plate and Wing with a link to the Bp Wing section.

I think if we are all honest we'd admit that the BP/W crowd is a vocal one that sometimes seems to dismiss all traditional BCD's out of hand (perception, I know that isn't the intent of all BP/W advocates)

 

[divad]

But if you take a one-ring circus and split it into two rings, it's still going to be a circus.

LOL





.........................

 

[cerich]

Splitting the forum will simply generate two forums where backplates/wings and BCDs are debated.

Like pony bottles, spare air, computers, noisemakers, PADI versus everyone else, etc. there will always be a certain number of morbidly repetitive subjects, each with its own permanent debate.

The best you can hope for is to have the debates become more refined and reasoned over time, so that the advantages and disadvantages of each option are more broadly understood by the participants. The alternative is to have each side's true believers continue to argue with one another on the level of "nyah, you're another" and "so's your old man!". Is that too much to hope for? Yeah, probably.....

But if you take a one-ring circus and split it into two rings, it's still going to be a circus.

IMHO...

Not if we impose the same "no troll" rule as is being done now in the DIR section.

And lets be honest, the DIR aspect is one of the reasons there is the perception of bias againts traditional BCD's that Jarrod posted this...

 

[MtnDiver]

right, but since a BP/Wings IS a BCD, the thread is on topic, and this is useful information.

why de-facto eliminate one of many possible responses?

i'd just be weary of limiting what people can respond with to a question when the response is clearly on topic

this division of BP/wings from BCD's is artificial. they're all just different styles of a bouyancy device.

Prime example of what I was speaking of as being "off-topic" in this thread. OP posted for ideas on a good travel BC and specifically said "Has to be jacket, not wing." The first two posts go right into the "you need a BP/W".

http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=162044

How about a sticky at the top of the Traditional BCD section (if we do it) that says along the lines of

ALSO consider a Back Plate and Wing with a link to the Bp Wing section.

If you're going to do that, then there should also be a sticky at the top of the BP/W section that says "ALSO consider a jacket BCD with a link to the jacket section".

Better yet, just make a general sticky for the whole jacket vs back-inflate vs BP/W argument and let all the arguing go on there.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

Not if we impose the same "no troll" rule as is being done now in the DIR section.

While I see your point, these two debates are not analogous. The matter of DIR involved a pointed perception on the part of a limited number of respondants that other "forms" of diving were inherently inferior. Aside from the perception itself, the generous offering of condescension and often ill-informed prejudice which accompanied the perception proved invariably to be incendiary.

The BC/BPwings case is more along the lines of, say, "redundant gas"; where there may be true believers on both sides of the debate but there is a less-militant rejection of every aspect of the other side's position than in the case of DIR.

It comes down to identification of "trolling" (from a moderator's perspective). It is clearly trolling to go to the DIR forum and state "DIR sucks".

This clear distinction may not always be present with the BC/BP case. For example, over the years we've often seen petite women complaining that BCs fit them poorly, rub them in tender spots, ride up on them, etc. In cases where a diver's anatomy makes an off-the-rack BC - which are many things but which cannot be individually custom cut and fit - unsuitable for that specific diver, an infinitely adjustable BC such as one of the bp/wing options may indeed be the optimal fit for that specific diver. If this question arises in the "BCD" forum, is it trolling to suggest the small petite woman consider an infinitely adjustable bp/wing option?

Rather than split the forum, I would prefer an approach similar to that currently being used in [[hangs head and kicks at the dirt]] the "Creation vrs. Evolution" thread. While I hate to use that thread as an example of anything, the point is that its a contentious issue, strongly felt on both sides, which through proper adherence to respect for different perspectives and participants manages to avoid train wrecks on any greater basis than once a month or so.

We need to "think things through thoroughly" to avoid solving one problem by creating several more.

And lets be honest, the DIR aspect is one of the reasons there is the perception of bias againts traditional BCD's that Jarrod posted this...

Chris, I have no idea what you mean by this sentence. Are you referring to Jarrod Jablonski?

Doc