Would you dive with someone who wouldn't share air if you were OOA?

[2Tours N Iraq`]

I have not read every post so please excuse me if I am restating what someone else has already said. I think it is important to remember that the training agencies teach OOA emergencies and air sharing for a reason. Being a rescue diver I understand the argument of one victim being better than two but using that same argument zero victims is better than one victim. I would not dive with anyone who tells me before hand that they would not share air in the event I have an OOA emergency. There are too many other factors that could happen other than poor gas management that would create an OOA emergency, such as a reg that starts leaking in the middle of the dive, an o-ring blows out underwater, free-flowing reg, etc. Personally, I would share my air with someone in a heartbeat as long as it doesn't create a scenario where I would become a victim as well.

 

[redrover]

redrover, you are just a hippy.

it is the Hawaii mentality...all people with character flaws leave the burbs, and come here, you know that.

Ah Catherine,
You don’t know the half of it.:blinking:
Half these born before dirt years were in Alaska.

 

[2Tours N Iraq`]

Half these born before dirt years were in Alaska.

Huh??

 

[Shawley]

never ever!

 

[redrover]

I grew up in prePipeline Alaska, some of you may not remember Alaska was then rather far off the beaten track. I got to travel what was called Outside and here in Hawaii, The Mainland; it was clearly something altogether different.


Realizing Leave it to Beaver’s neighborhood was not a movie set, most people bought dinner vs. shot, fished and grew it; I was odd. But then come to think of it, I didn’t know anyone that wasn’t odd in at least one way or another. People with rather odd views were a simple fact of life for me.

 

[woolfie]

definately not!!

 

[redrover]

Let's take it a little further than an intellectual exercise.

This is all an intellectual exercise for me, finding it particularly useful for situations I’ve not, and in this case, would probably never envision.

Did you say "yes", or did you equivocate when you said you "suppose" you'd buddy up with someone who stated they wouldn't save your life when it was so easy to do?
Can you lay out your reasoning why? They're just being honest? You're self-sufficient anyway? Self-sufficiency trumps trust? They're otherwise fun to be with?

I answered yes, I would dive with some one who told me they would not share air with me…way back or very early on. From reading the numerous posts who would not; I’ve given it more thought.
Now, if the sole factor in question was buddy not share air, I say yes. What’s the big deal? I dive Solo, and as if Solo as a rule, heck if I did OOA there’s a chance he would recant. Besides, there are more ways to skin a cat, who’s to say he wouldn’t be willing to save my life in every other multitude of ways possible?

Suppose was since I had not been in the position, I have no basis to confirm; at least I did before? While I am surprised at so much indignation people responded to the OOA portion of that question, they certainly are entitled to their beliefs. You appear to believe in ways I do not. We are just looking at the scenario from (apparently) opposite sides of perspective. Kinda funny too as I’m often the one to read more into a situation than I needed to. I naturally assumed there was a good reason (by my nature) and you just naturally assumed there was an evil one. I’m reasonably confidant I would ask what the reason was. And that response could very well sway my vote to nay.

Would you dive with someone who wouldn't share air if you were OOA?
Yes, my perception was a clear informed situation, “You should know, I won’t share air.” If I didn’t know they wouldn’t, and had the unfortunate need to find it out; regrettably I cannot turn back time, so why go there?

• My assumption is this person is notifying me in advance of the dive providing opportunity to make an informed decision.
• If I was in that position, mistakenly in buddy bliss and OOA, assuming I made my way out to air, I would be pretty POed.

Potential sociopaths or narcissists can generate intense responses in most people since most people value cooperation, caring and trust.

Remember, in this exercise, no rationale was given for his blanket refusal to share air in an emergency. We can assume he states he's taking care of Number One and you don't matter at crunch time. B'bye loser, I might need this air!

No, we do not assume that, you do, as do many others, obviously. I’m not saying you are wrong, just that I don’t agree.

This "odd thing" is the deliberate decision to deny easily provided assistance knowing that the other person may well lose their life as a result. This level of character defect is likely to be pervasive and global for this person, IMHO.

I have had the luck (?) to interact with diagnosed (and some under very heavily armed guard) personality disorder types. While the criminals you may have heard of would not be my choice of diving partner, most of the really odd ducks had many redeeming qualities. The sociopath I knew very well I would dive with although I don’t recommend anyone date a sociopath.
My experience is just that one aspect of a persons personality does not necessarily cross over all things about them.

Remember, it's an unqualified refusal to save a life. No reasons were given.

Was he asked? Was this one sentence just an isolated snippet of a conversation?

This "odd thng" isn't unknown. It shows up all the time in society. It's a "red flag" that many people here have recognized as a probable sign of a pervasive malignancy in this person's character and an unacceptable departure from cooperation, caring and trust.

That's why many have said not only would they not dive with him, they wouldn't associate at all.

It's not surprising that not everybody sees it that way and some feel that, whatever it is, it's inconsequential since their self-sufficiency will protect them from any problems such a person may create. That's fine.

Yes, not quite ‘everybody’ sees it that way. But I don't see nor feel it is inconsequential.

It's not clear yet what your thinking is. It's easy to state it clearly and unambiguously if you want to take this beyond a mental exercise.

How dare you (falsely) assume stating anything clearly and easily is easy for me?
BTW I don’t get what you mean by beyond a mental exercise. I’d be quite surprised if a buddy did tell me that.
I trust myself to remain calm in a crisis but I’ve had no need to share air. It could be I’ll flip my gourd and would be less surprised if denied at the point of need with all the recent leave panicked people alone comments elsewhere. (No offence implied to them.)

Can you simply state one good reason for a blanket refusal to provide life-saving assistance when it can be done easily and without significant risk?

I did ask the Medical folk about that one odd thing (I agree it would be mighty odd.) Only one actual medical response that was personal not stating factual knowledge. I’d like to hear more medical opinions, you could be correct.

Can you say whether you share such an attitude or approach?

And again, I do not share your blanket views, and open to correction.

This is just an opinion of course, but I'd say there's a significant likelihood that this deeply flawed person could create any number of hazards for their "buddy" as they take care of "Numero Uno".

We need to understand his reasons for refusal first, I'd say. This exercise did not supply any rationale for his blanket refusal to provide lifesaving assistance in the form of sharing air.
This may come down to views about human nature and what constitutes an unacceptable departure from cooperation, caring and trust in general relationships, let alone in a dive buddy relationship.

My buddies have always been people who share a value in cooperation, caring and trust, so they present NO hazards related to that. Normal hazards from mistakes and other circumstances are infrequent and easily managed.

The point is that such an attitude or decision (refusal to share air in an emergency) is probably extremely rare.

Agree

It's bizarre,

Agree.

problematic

Could be.

and a red-flag.

Yes, it deserves consideration.

This; there must be something wrong with a diver who plans to dive as if there is no buddy source of redundant air I find a bit annoying. Could you explain the posturing you suspect…posturing about what?

I didn't hear that issue raised by anyone.

Begin with Post# 16.

To the contrary, some people have pointed out that such self-sufficiency is a good thing. I totally agree. I always have an al30 pony on all my dives, whether they are solo or with a buddy. I plan to be self-sufficient.

However, this flawed diver may present unknown hazards that self-sufficiency won't surmount. And then there's the trust factor. Can you really be sure he won't violate your interests in other ways?

If I knew them to be one nasty SOB is one thing. If I don’t know someone, how can I be sure they won't violate my interests in other ways? I feel trust implies risk.
Off the top of my head, a fellow I barely knew, a Rhoades Scholar and beloved by all that knew him well, I would never buddy with. From my little experience with his thought processes, he would be exactly the buddy saying, ‘Oh, I don’t do that. Should I have mentioned it before?’

My comment about posturing was related to what I said that some people might be asserting their self-sufficiency rather than being honest.
I don't think I understand your point.

What question was missed? The question of "will you share air with a dive buddy who refuses to share air with you?"

I’ve been working very long hours for weeks, I can get cranky. What do I do in my leisure time? Read and post on ScubaBoard. Yes, it is fun :blinking: although formatting this, not so much.
You have no reasonable expectation of knowing my irritation over the years here of posters answering questions such as ‘would you dive with a jerk’ by ‘I’m not jerk’. Please forgive my crankiness.

This thread is about diving with the jerk not about whether one has to be a jerk in return.

‘A jerk’ is subjective and can take many forms.

Please clarify, if you will.
Dave C

 

[dave4868]

This is all an intellectual exercise for me, finding it particularly useful for situations I’ve not, and in this case, would probably never envision.

Certainly agree it would be rare. Perhaps the main usefulness of the thread topic is to get people to consider their most basic expectations of a buddy.

Snipped many thoughtful points.

I’ve been working very long hours for weeks, I can get cranky. What do I do in my leisure time? Read and post on ScubaBoard. Yes, it is fun :blinking: although formatting this, not so much.

I do appreciate your thoughtful responses, especially considering the effort involved in formatting.

Diving is so much easier!

Dave C

 

[hvulin]

I would be in the sea regardless of him so technically the answer is yes! But I would dive it like its a solo dive...

there are some very strange people around the world but I'll still go diving....

 

[Zerovis]

not a chance but if I did there would be no question if I needed it I'd get it