"Michael Doelle" wrote:

LB>>Even without dives together, you're entitled to an opinion.<

> But given our dives together, I have an opinion that is based on facts.

Outdated, but otherwise granted.

LB>  Given how long it has been since your last dive with me, your opinion 
on my present skill level is not likely to be
> particularly relevant, but you're still entitled to have one.

> Wow, what happened? Did you do a Cavern course or something equally major?

Perhaps.  What was my highest certification when we last dove together?  Is 
it necessary to obtain more cards to improve your diving skills?  Would it 
surprise you to know that one of my most frequent dive buddies is a WKPP 
team member?

MD> single tank                Wrong

>Ponies don't  count. How many dives on doubles have you done? Please don't 
>say "1".

How about stage tanks.  I have three of them, two 40s and a 30.  All marked 
for a MOD of 70 feet.

MD> warm water              Correct

MD> shallow                     Not by any certification agency, including 
GUE

> OK, done a deep dive by agency standard then. Check.

Funny, I don't recall suggesting it was only one.  Putting words in my mouth 
again?

MD> wet suit                     Only when I have to

MD> no deco                     Wrong

> 5 minutes on the dive computer isn't deco diving. And you know yhat.

Actually, I disagree with you, but no matter.  I hardly bought stage tanks 
in order to do 5 minutes of deco.  I normally plan my dives with Deco 
Planner, you know, the program developed and marketed by GUE.  I normally do 
the dives with my multi gas computer.

LB>It seems I was right.  You haven't a clue.  Four out of five wrong. 
Perhaps you should listen some more.

> Seems like you're wrong again.

Still think so?

MD>PPS: I've made lots of peace offers to you  in the last couple of years
(OK, maybe just two). You chose to ignore all of them.

LB>Really?  Either I didn't see them (I've only been reading your posts
selectively), or I saw and misunderstood them.
Try again.  I'll try to be more observant and responsive.<

> Sure you saw them. You rejected them, saying you had been right all along 
> (about dragging my name over to
> rec.scuba).

I still think I was justified in posting your comments here, about my 
friends there, to the forum you were addressing.  I would have done the same 
if the situation were reversed.  I suppose it's OK for you and Bob to 
repeatedly bring comments from TechDiver and rec.scuba to this forum, but 
not OK for someone else to do it to you.  You think what you like.

I still don't recall any attempts at reconciliation.  Should I presume this 
thread is one of them?

My offer for you to apologize for that still stands. So let's test your 
responsiveness in this respect.

Your offer of reconciliation requires me to apologize.  Strange, that sounds 
remarkably like I'm the one you want to reconcile.  Have you apologized for 
your comments about my friends in rec.scuba?

Lee