Ok, here's another $.03

>Not sure if you do, but I'll settle for you saying that you do.  :-))
>
>That's the crux of the entire discussion for me.  I am a DIE HARD
>on self responsibility and self reliance, and I preach THAT gospel
>every chance I get.
>
The bottom line is that Feeesh is right on here.  When diving one must
be responsible for
oneself.

>>My main concern is the image presented of diving when an operator
>>responds to the media in an inappropriate way. :-)
>>
>>
>To tell the truth that some divers did it to themselves when the
>media is out to crucify the operator unjustifiably?
>
Telling the truth is often "hard" and seems insensitive, especially when
it involves the death
of a family member.  I'm not going to make any judgements about what he
or she said.
There indeed may be issues here dealing with eyewitness reports/etc, but
- and this is a
BIG but...  As far as I know, no one on this list with forensic
experience has directly
interviewed any eyewitnesses or any members of the crew or even Phd, so,
all we have
to go on is what has been "reported" (I'm sure someone will correct me
if I'm wrong).

Now I know SOME of you believe everything you read in the newspaper,
but, in a case
like this, sensationalism is often overplayed - after all - it's the
gore, death, destruction that
creates headlines and draws readership to newpapers and periodicals.
 Who ever bought
a magazine that had a headline "Everything went pretty well today"???

>>>>>What was Hasson supposed to do other than refuting the false
>>>>>allegations and put blame where blame belong?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>You didn't really have a good answer for that.
>
>>But accepting that he was the media spokesperson for his organisation
>>then, it seems to me, he handled it very badly! :-)
>>
>>
>Only to the extent that he wasn't a very good politician, perhaps.
>He had a little too much of MY style.  :-)  You want him to
>sugar coat everything, hide the hideous truth that some divers
>SHOULDN'T be divers, and the industry is sparkling clean and
>everyone will live happily thereafter once the incident is
>forgotten ... until the next time.
>
Once again, Feesh is right on.  Just like everything - some people
shouldn't hang glide, some
people shouldn't ski, and some people shouldn't be private pilots -
those who venture into
arenas that they're not well suited for and don't train hard/etc are
those more likely to
get into trouble.  This says absolutely *nothing* about this specific
instance, but is true
in genearl.

As far as "speculations" by anyone from Phd - remember - the people
working those boats
have seen hundreds, probably thousands of divers come through.  They
know what happens,
they've heard about all the "close calls" and what divers see and
experience under the water
and, they've made those dives more than anyone else.  Their speculation
is based on observation
and is more likely to be accurate than anyone of ours, or the medias.
Their observations are
more than simply anecdotal and while they may not provide sufficient
evidence to build up any
scientific hypotheses, they are certainly more valuable than one who has
either never been
there or one who has only been there a handful of times.

>>(snip)
>>
>>
>>>>>These Dive Masters are nothing more then Dive GUIDES.
>>>>>
Right on.  They should be able to describe what's going on underwater,
tell you what to look
for and what to watch out for.  They're like the tour guides on a bus -
pointing things out -
only they don't ride on the bus and you get to walk around on your own
lookin for things.
Oh, and don't forget - they have to make the coffee :^)

>>>On
>>>liveaboards such as Cocos, there are TWO DMs and 19 divers.  They
>>>give the briefing.  They are in the water to guide and shoot
>>>photos of divers.  But DON'T expect them to be baby sitters for
>>>incompetent divers!
>>>
>>>
>>It's a fact of life that, in a growing activity, there will always be new
>>divers, or those whose previous diving experience hasn't equipped them to
>>handle the new environment.
>>
>>
>Then they SHOULDN'T go places like Cocos and dive above their heads!
>
>Remember "Know YOUR limits and dive WITHIN them?"   :-)
>
>>A good DM should be able to establish which
>>divers *might* need looking out for and - without being obtrusive
>>about it -keep an eye on those individuals.
>>
I disagree with this statement entirely.  Let's say person "X" takes a
trip to Cocos.  He's a fine
diver.  Another diver "Y" takes the same trip and isn't prepared.
 Should the DM have to
spend the entire trip watching after "Y" which could definitely impact
negatively on "X"'s
experience?  I don't think so.  If "X" has been duly cautioned and
warned about the
conditions and chooses to dive ANYWAY, then that's their choice, no one
elses.

>They do that.  But it's impossible to keep everyone alive that way.
>There was a diver at the Tahiti Aggressor who had done only 8
>dives after certification.  She didn't belong there!!  To her
>credit, she sat out most of the dives.  That's the way it SHOULD
>be if someone is in that situation of being in the wrong place
>at the wrong time.
>
Yep - self reliance - responsible for self.  This is stressed during the
open water course
or at least should be.  It is also stressed that divers should always
handle new situations
with an experienced diver at their side, so, if someone who had never
dove in currents
or conditions similar to Cocos wanted to go, it would be a good idea for
them to bring
along their own buddy to help them out.    Even then, before they
attempted such a dive
they should "work their way up" to that level of diving ability.

>Jay was a good DM when I first dived Cocos.  He reminded divers
>their SELF responsibility to not get into trouble by saying
>something like, "The closest chamber is 300 miles away.  If
>you get into trouble, you'll ruin the vacation of everyone
>else because everyone will have to go back with you."
>
While I like their up front honest attitude, with the cost of today's
portable chambers there's
no reason in the world why a boat like that shouldn't have one, even
two.  But, that's
a discussion for a different thread.

>Did you read my report?   There was no "check out" on the
>first dive.  Everyone THERE was supposed to know what they
>were doing.  Jay plunged to 130 fsw on the first dive taking
>picture of a hammerhead that was there.  I went along
>comforably with him there, and below.
>
>If any of the divers above got into trouble as those two did,
>what would Strike have said???   That he should have been up
>there watching them?  Watching WHOM?  No SIree ... that's
>just NOT the way dives are done there.  It's not, and it
>shouldn't be.  EVERYONE takes care of themselves!
>
On the Truth Aquatics boats out of Santa Barbara the DMs don't even get in
the water - they stay on the boat.  They help you get into and out of the
water and are ready in case they MIGHT be needed, but, they're not
there to babysit the divers.

>No one got into trouble that week, and the next week, and
>every week for over 10 years until those two Bozos showed up.
>
>It's the SAME dangerous diving conditions.  The SAME currents.
>The SAME dive sites.
>
And, who knows - accidents happen that are NOT anyones fault. Heart
Attack or other
things can come up in an instant.

>>>There's no way around it.  They CAN'T babysit all 19 divers.
>>>Each one of those divers should be responsible for THEMSELVES.
>>>
>>>
>>True!  But presumably there's some sort of procedure in place to determine
>>the experience and skill level of the divers - in that particular
>>environment - and then to unobtrusively watch out for  those people?
>>
>>
>To tell them unobtrusively that they shouldn't get into the water? :-)
>
>Yeah, that'll work, NOT!
>
The guides are there to be that - guides - NOT babysitters.  They're
guides for those who
are appropriately experienced and ready for the dives, NOT for those ill
equipped to handle
the circumstances.  Again, why should people who are ready and able have
their experience
suffer because others aren't prepared or ready?

>>>>To my way of thinking, paying customers exposed to a new environment
>>>>deserve more respect than that.
>>>>
To my way of thinking, paying customers exposed to a new environment
should MAKE SURE
they're ready for it by working their way up to those situations.  By
NOT doing so they could
unreasonably, and even negligently, put other people in jeopardy.  Think
about it - if you
had only done some small time auto racing would you hop in an Indy car
and go out and
race?  No - you'd build your way up to it.

>The respect they get is to be TRUSTED that they would exercise SELF
>RESPECT by exercising SELF responsibility.
>
>>>They may work around some easy, non-current dive sites, but it just
>>>doesn't work that way at all at Cocos, or the Tahiti Passes, or
>>>a few other sites of rapid current!  The divers can spread over
>>>a MILE during the course of a dive.  You want 19 DMs wating 19
>>>divers?   Don't be ridiculous.
>>>
>>>
>>Of course, I don't!  :-)
>>
>>But if I operated a vessel, I would expect my DM's to be able to determine
>>whether the dive was safe and within the qualifications and recent
>>experience of my customers.
>>
>>
>You would be in the wrong place in Cocos.  :-)  It doesn't work THERE!
>Actually, it doesn't work that way anywhere.  If you get a bunch
>of incompetent and irresponsible divers, even if you tow each them
>on a short rope, some of them may still drown.
>
>
>>>That's why I said in the wake of the incident, it's time for everyone
>>>to WAKE UP to the fact that a certified diver is supposed to be a
>>>RESPONSIBLE diver, and not a whiny baby blaming a DM or a crew
>>>for his own incompetence!
>>>
>>>
>>I tend to agree - unless it's truly warranted.  Which is why I earlier
>>
>>
>wrote
>
>
>>that neither is it Hasson's responsibility to apportion blame.
>>
Accident happen.  Does that mean there is *always* blame to place?

>>Condoning such "always blame someone else" syndrone, with no self
>>soul searching on the ills of the system and society, is the WORST
>>thing that can happen before, during, and after any such incident.
>>
>>
>>Agreed!  :-)))
>>
>>Strike
>>
>>
>On that final note of agreement, though we still have plenty of
>other places of "minor" disagreements about responsibility of
>DM and diver, I think this is as good a time and place to
>bring OUR (you and me) discussion of this subject to a close.
>
>I yield the floor to other distinquished and undistinguished
>buzos on this list.  :-)
>
>
Carl