Unsafe tec instructor - can anything be done before disaster strikes?

[J-Vo]

WTF is a "stroke" in the context you are using it?
When and where did this term originate?

-Z

"[P]ossibly the most important piece of wisdom in the diving world, and is something we should all apply to all of our diving. It is, simply, 'Don't dive with strokes.'

The term 'stroke' refers to someone who, knowing there is a better system, chooses to dive in a less than optimal way. It applies to those instructors who encourage students (who know no better) to exercise personal preference to sell more equipment. It applies to those who don't plan their dives, dive beyond their abilities, dive deep on air, take unnecessary risks, do big dives using unfamiliar gear, or whose only reason for diving is depth.

Diving with strokes moves us into an area where our safety is no longer in our own hands. Strokes are sometimes highly 'qualified'. Often they seem very confident - usually because they have no concept of the danger they are getting themselves, and you, into. — Billy Williams. (also attributed to George M Irvine III)"

 

[Zef]

"[P]ossibly the most important piece of wisdom in the diving world, and is something we should all apply to all of our diving. It is, simply, 'Don't dive with strokes.'

The term 'stroke' refers to someone who, knowing there is a better system, chooses to dive in a less than optimal way. It applies to those instructors who encourage students (who know no better) to exercise personal preference to sell more equipment. It applies to those who don't plan their dives, dive beyond their abilities, dive deep on air, take unnecessary risks, do big dives using unfamiliar gear, or whose only reason for diving is depth.

Diving with strokes moves us into an area where our safety is no longer in our own hands. Strokes are sometimes highly 'qualified'. Often they seem very confident - usually because they have no concept of the danger they are getting themselves, and you, into. — Billy Williams. (also attributed to George M Irvine III)"

seems like an Americanized version of the British term "wanker".

-Z

 

[lostsheep]

There is a difference between being green/inexperienced and being an unsafe diver. This is more often than not a personality / group culture trait.

An inexperienced diver who respects their limits and works to build capacity is a likely to be a safe diver. An experienced diver who views themselves as being on the leading edge & figuring things out vs. learning from others who came before them is likely to be unsafe.

I could have worded it better but for the most part we are in violent agreement, see the portion of my comment about instruction, mentoring, and experience. I am a firm believer in all 3 to the point I got fired from teaching with a local shop for refusing to immediately push brand new OW divers into further classes to raise money for the shop. I encourage all of my students to stay within their limits, to find mentors, and to gain experience at the level they are trained to before going further. I tell them with experience they will know when their diving needs have progressed to the point further training is needed.

Let me try to rephrase; I do believe less experienced divers are LESS safe than more experienced divers, perhaps UNsafe was too strong of a word.

I found it very difficult for a long time to find buddies or mentors to learn from and in that time we did some stupid ****. I try very hard to point newbies in the right direction in the interest of keeping them safer and to encourage them to keep diving. I hate this word but it's very plausible I get triggered by "don't dive with ___X___ " language because of my personal experiences and struggles.

Was I stroke, am I a stroke? Was I just inexperienced? Was it because no one would take a minor diving ? (I was certified as a child and no one else in my circle dived at that time) I can't answer these questions but I know the lack of interactions with other more experienced divers and young man's bravado contributed to the aforementioned stupid ****. If I can help others avoid this problem, I feel obligated to do so.

WTF is a "stroke" in the context you are using it?
When and where did this term originate?

-Z

I'm no lexicographer but I believe the below definition is accurate. I believe the term is inappropriately used too often to describe anyone with less experience than the person using it; this in turn justifies the cliques so prevalent in the diving community, see rule #1.

"[P]ossibly the most important piece of wisdom in the diving world, and is something we should all apply to all of our diving. It is, simply, 'Don't dive with strokes.'

The term 'stroke' refers to someone who, knowing there is a better system, chooses to dive in a less than optimal way. It applies to those instructors who encourage students (who know no better) to exercise personal preference to sell more equipment. It applies to those who don't plan their dives, dive beyond their abilities, dive deep on air, take unnecessary risks, do big dives using unfamiliar gear, or whose only reason for diving is depth.

Diving with strokes moves us into an area where our safety is no longer in our own hands. Strokes are sometimes highly 'qualified'. Often they seem very confident - usually because they have no concept of the danger they are getting themselves, and you, into. — Billy Williams. (also attributed to George M Irvine III)"

Flame on...

 

[NothingClever]

Setting aside authorship and the acerbic promulgation that came with it, that definition of ‘stroke’ has rather stood the test of time.

 

[DANDM]

This is what I was thinking - thank you for confirming that it wouldn't do any good...

I don't understand or agree with this point of view. Realistically, yeah, complaining to an agency may not lead to anything of significance before disaster strikes. But, if you make a complaint in writing, and disaster does strike later on, the agency can't defend themselves by saying that no one reported to them, so they couldn't do anything.

Leave a paper trail, it may be useless today, but you never know if it could lead to justice tomorrow. It's just an email too, it shouldn't be too time consuming.

Even if progress is excruciatingly slow, the dive community should keep the pressure up to demand better standards and monitoring.

 

[rjack321]

I don't understand or agree with this point of view. Realistically, yeah, complaining to an agency may not lead to anything of significance before disaster strikes. But, if you make a complaint in writing, and disaster does strike later on, the agency can't defend themselves by saying that no one reported to them, so they couldn't do anything.

Leave a paper trail, it may be useless today, but you never know if it could lead to justice tomorrow. It's just an email too, it shouldn't be too time consuming.

Even if progress is excruciatingly slow, the dive community should keep the pressure up to demand better standards and monitoring.

Life is too short for the OP to spend their time or energy policing the willfully ignorant. And depending on jurisdiction, opens them up to all sorts of libel laws or being cast out of their local scuba social net.

It's perfectly acceptable to simply disengage from those who partake dumb stuff - scuba related or otherwise.