undercurrent magazine??

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!

mdb:
At least the advice here is independent and honest and current.

Such a statement can not be made about the advice here, or on any web board where the posters are cloaked by fictitious names.

In fact, there are some, how many I don't know, collaberations to push a particular brand or product.

So, the rule of Buyer/Reader/??? Beware is as valid here as anywhere else.
 
ArcticDiver:
Such a statement can not be made about the advice here, or on any web board where the posters are cloaked by fictitious names.

In fact, there are some, how many I don't know, collaberations to push a particular brand or product.

So, the rule of Buyer/Reader/??? Beware is as valid here as anywhere else.
I prefer to think of the board - all boards of this type for that matter- as someones's opinion - I'm not into conspiracy theories; prefer to believe the best until proved wrong - although anything is possible I suppose.......

The problem in a short post on any subject is you often need much more info - and my "10" could be your "4" - Its like any recommendation; all depends on the experience and expectations.
 
Ben Davison:
but discontinued it after Doc Adelman complained. ....there was an apparent conflict of interest and no one other than my favorite curmudgeon -- Doc --complained so that ended that.

No, Ben, not true. I was the first one to notice it and call you on it. If I had that much power over you, you wouldn't have to continue smearing the following false story:

Ben Davison:
PS: Doc was never very happy that we exposed the months of serious GI tract illnesses divers into the hundreds contracted at his favorite haunt, Coco View; It's been several years and I thought he might have gotten over that by now.

Ben, it's hard for me to "get over" your deliberate publication of mis-truths in order to simply boost your sales and cause a stir.

There was no problem "at CoCoView". It was Island wide among all the Bay Islands Resorts. You and "your staff" ignored the facts. CoCoview resolved it for all of the resorts by finding evidence of conatmination of Honduran Government Approved cheese.

You attacked CoCoView because it made for good headlines and subscriptions. If only your retractions had been as large!

It makes no difference to me if it was my favorite resort or not, but it truly is. What matters is that you attacked an institution of diving while knowing full well that the problem was happening at every resort.

Keep churning out your smarm, but know that even my bird doesn't like it. Undercurrent? I don't think so.

ScubaBoard works.
 
Once upon a time a big monk and a little monk were traveling together. They came to the bank of a river and found the bridge was damaged. They had to wade across the river. There was a pretty lady who was stuck at the damaged bridge and couldn't cross the river. The big monk offered to carry the pretty lady across the river on his back. The lady accepted. The little monk was shocked by the move of the big monk.

'How can big brother carry a lady when we are supposed to avoid all intimacy with females?' thought the little monk. But he kept quiet. The big monk carried the lady across the river and the small monk followed unhappily. When they crossed the river, the big monk let the lady down and they parted ways with her. All along the way for several miles, the little monk was very unhappy with the act of the big monk. He was making up all kinds of accusations about big monk in his head. This got him madder and madder. But he still kept quiet. And the big monk had no inclination to explain his situation.

Finally, at a rest point many hours later, the little monk could not stand it any further, he burst out angrily at the big monk. 'How can you claim yourself a devout monk, when you seize the first opportunity to touch a female, especially when she is very pretty? All your teachings to me make you a big hypocrite.

The big monk looked surprised and said, 'I had put down the pretty lady at the river bank many hours ago, how come you are still carrying her along?'
 
I like the "no advertising" approach in the monthly subscription. But the best part is receiving the yearly Travelin' Diver's chapbook opinions on dive resorts and live-aboards that help in planning dive trips. It's worth the fee.
 
Ben Davison:
Once upon a time a big monk and a little monk were traveling together. They came to the bank of a river and found the bridge was damaged. They had to wade across the river. There was a pretty lady who was stuck at the damaged bridge and couldn't cross the river. The big monk offered to carry the pretty lady across the river on his back. The lady accepted. The little monk was shocked by the move of the big monk.

'How can big brother carry a lady when we are supposed to avoid all intimacy with females?' thought the little monk. But he kept quiet. The big monk carried the lady across the river and the small monk followed unhappily. When they crossed the river, the big monk let the lady down and they parted ways with her. All along the way for several miles, the little monk was very unhappy with the act of the big monk. He was making up all kinds of accusations about big monk in his head. This got him madder and madder. But he still kept quiet. And the big monk had no inclination to explain his situation.

Finally, at a rest point many hours later, the little monk could not stand it any further, he burst out angrily at the big monk. 'How can you claim yourself a devout monk, when you seize the first opportunity to touch a female, especially when she is very pretty? All your teachings to me make you a big hypocrite.

The big monk looked surprised and said, 'I had put down the pretty lady at the river bank many hours ago, how come you are still carrying her along?'


My guess is because you made the facts fit a preset agenda.......BUT, it's just a guess. :mooner:
 
Jupiter31:
I prefer to think of the board - all boards of this type for that matter- as someones's opinion - I'm not into conspiracy theories; prefer to believe the best until proved wrong - although anything is possible I suppose.......

The problem in a short post on any subject is you often need much more info - and my "10" could be your "4" - Its like any recommendation; all depends on the experience and expectations.

Your preference, as a preference, is noted. I, too, like to think the best of people.

But the unfortunate fact is that some people on web sites do go beyond giving honest opinions. Sometimes that extends into interpersonal collaberation to push a product, service, or for other economic gain. This web site is no different.

So, while it is fun and often useful to cyber dive and to use sites such as this to help gain information the user should always use caution. When fictitious names are used everyone should exercise Caution with a capital "C" before taking, or using any advise that may cost them.
 
The reader reports are good and provide opinions based on actual experiences, however I don't give the reader reports on Undercurrent any more authority/credibility than the reviews on this board, scubadiving.com or other websites dedicated to diving. They all provide value to a certain degree and collectively help give people an idea of what they are dealing with when searching for a dive operator, resort or destination. I have on the other hand seen an obvious pattern over the years within the rest of the "magazine." Favorable stories are written about the personal favorites of the contributing writers of UC and those that aren't popular with UC writers get consistently bad write-ups or no mention at all. Selling advertising or getting perks for support of the publication doens't bother me, but being untruthful about it does. I don't believe this statement for a minute, and actually know it to be factually incorrect on at least one occasion. Out of respect for my source, that's all I will say about it.
Ben Davison:
As for our independence, we've never taken a free trip, or even gotten a free dive and we never announce what we are doing at a resort -- we pay rack rate.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom