Wikipedia article on "Doing It Right"

[rlynch]

Dan do you have a copy of the orignal Tallahassee democrate article in which George coined the phrase "Doing It Right" or if you can give me a date or author i can get it from them directly.
I believe it was in that article that the name was solidified.

 

[boulderjohn]

The way I planned on handling this was to ask Jarrod for one of his guys to write a page on this....

And that is a solution that assumes that GUE and Jarrod are the controlling factors for what constitutes DIR today. There are those who will dispute that.

Please note that I am not advocating anything other than a realization that the problem exists. I was trained by UTD, and I was told that what I was learning was DIR. That training gives me access to the DIR practitioners forum on SB. I am not currently a UTD member and have my differences with that agency, but I recognize that UTD and GUE both claim to be DIR. They are not, however, the same, and I suspect they will continue to diverge in the future.

 

[danvolker]

And that is a solution that assumes that GUE and Jarrod are the controlling factors for what constitutes DIR today. There are those who will dispute that.

Please note that I am not advocating anything other than a realization that the problem exists. I was trained by UTD, and I was told that what I was learning was DIR. That training gives me access to the DIR practitioners forum on SB. I am not currently a UTD member and have my differences with that agency, but I recognize that UTD and GUE both claim to be DIR. They are not, however, the same, and I suspect they will continue to diverge in the future.

No one can dispute that George and Jarrod created DIR. Since they created it, it should follow that THEY, not Andrew or anyone else, are the controlling factors on what DIR is today.

 

[boulderjohn]

No one can dispute that George and Jarrod created DIR. Since they created it, it should follow that THEY, not Andrew or anyone else, are the controlling factors on what DIR is today.

And many people agree with you. The fact that UTD thinks that what it teaches is also DIR shows that not all do.

I think that an objective article has to at least recognize this difference of opinion.

Once again, I am not taking a position myself. I just recognize that there is a difference of opinion on this issue.

 

[danvolker]

And many people agree with you. The fact that UTD thinks that what it teaches is also DIR shows that not all do.

I think that an objective article has to at least recognize this difference of opinion.

Once again, I am not taking a position myself. I just recognize that there is a difference of opinion on this issue.

There may well be people all over the planet that are DIR'ish, and think they are DIR, and try to be....the issue is who created DIR, and that gives them the right to define it. To let Andrew or others have the right to define it, opens up 100's of people who will claim the right..making a definition of DIR impossible.

 

[boulderjohn]

There may well be people all over the planet that are DIR'ish, and think they are DIR, and try to be....the issue is who created DIR, and that gives them the right to define it. To let Andrew or others have the right to define it, opens up 100's of people who will claim the right..making a definition of DIR impossible.

And an objective article will include this point of view. It should also explain why there are competing points of view. I think a short paragraph that includes the argument in your last posts would cover it.

 

[boulderjohn]

I happened to look at the Wikipedia article on PADI in reference to another thread. If you think DIR is treated unfairly, you should read that article. I used the word count feature in MS Word to determine that the section on criticism, which includes the "Put Another Dollar In" reference and "dumbing down" arguments,has nearly as many words as the entire rest of the article. The entire background and history section has 301 words, and the criticism section has 422 words. If it were not for the section on the size of the organization, the article would be more criticism than explanation. It also has incorrect and misleading information, and if you go to the talk page you see why--they really don't have much in the way of people who really know anything about the organization writing the article. One guy was arguing that they need to have information about PADI's anti-trust policy requiring all instructors to use PADI-owned liability insurance, something that has never been true. (At least that one got corrected.)

I have to say that reading that article and the talk part has really opened my eyes wide on Wikipedia and how it is formed. Now that I know what goes on, I think I may choose a topic I don't know anything about either and start contributing.

 

[danvolker]

I happened to look at the Wikipedia article on PADI in reference to another thread. If you think DIR is treated unfairly, you should read that article. I used the word count feature in MS Word to determine that the section on criticism, which includes the "Put Another Dollar In" reference and "dumbing down" arguments,has nearly as many words as the entire rest of the article. The entire background and history section has 301 words, and the criticism section has 422 words. If it were not for the section on the size of the organization, the article would be more criticism than explanation. It also has incorrect and misleading information, and if you go to the talk page you see why--they really don't have much in the way of people who really know anything about the organization writing the article. One guy was arguing that they need to have information about PADI's anti-trust policy requiring all instructors to use PADI-owned liability insurance, something that has never been true. (At least that one got corrected.)

I have to say that reading that article and the talk part has really opened my eyes wide on Wikipedia and how it is formed. Now that I know what goes on, I think I may choose a topic I don't know anything about either and start contributing.

Wow...It's sick how this crap about showing both sides or many sides actually destroys the ability of an encyclopedia to help people understand what they want to learn about....Wiki needs to explain what things are....not what they are not.

 

[rlynch]

I agree dan,

Looks like revisions are happening in the article currently. (not by me, at this time)

 

[BluewaterSail]

Dan do you have a copy of the orignal Tallahassee democrate article in which George coined the phrase "Doing It Right" or if you can give me a date or author i can get it from them directly.
I believe it was in that article that the name was solidified.

I have seen an article written by GI3 on www.direxplorers.com which I think was his first public explanation of DIR. I have never been successful in searching their library, but they have a cycling display of articles on their home page, so everything pops up eventually. Maybe you will show a higher level of search skill and be able to find it. Or join the board and ask.

Linda