Marine Scientist and Master Instructor (retired)
- Reaction score
- U.S. East Coast
- # of dives
- 2500 - 4999
I do not want to defend the scuba industry, but I would like to point out that:
Unfortunately, they do reflect on you, and on me, on all instructors. The public does not make the fine distinctions we'd like to make, so if we are part of "the industry" and the "industry sucks" then we get tarred too. It is not to our advantage to run around publically saying the industry sucks.I don't believe that the transgressions of different agencies reflects to me as an instructor, professional, or person.
"Facts" depend on who states them. You have given some "facts" above, but we do not get to hear the other side of the matter. It is your word against no word; the agencies do not listen to that. One person's unsubstantiated word is no different than bashing; it is not a fact until both sides have been heard.stating facts is and never will be bashing.
Did you just say "I saw" or was there hard evidence that would stand up to scrutiny?I have, others have communicated dissatisfaction, reported incidents to no avail.
You've here crossed the line from trying to state facts to trying to offer a reason, a conclusion, YOUR conclusion. It is also possible that PADI's (and other agencies') experience is that more actual, court-admissible hard facts are needed to pursue a case, that the financial and reputational costs of unsuccessful litigation are not acceptable. It is not a "fact" that the reason to ignore your complaints is revenue; you don't know the reason. that is just your hypothesis, but offered here as a "fact." Not compelling, sorry.I have to accept that transgressions have been tolerated in the past and will likely be tolerated in the future for the sake of revenue.