Reef Fish wrote:

> In silt out situations in CAVE diving where the diver would not have to
> THINK where his and his buddy's gears are.  I totally agree with the
> DIR approach in THAT diving environment and buddy/multiple-diver system.

That is certainly one situation.  In fact, it's one I really didn't think
about.  Several others have have been discussed by those who appear to know.
One thing that comes to mind is the issue of buddy monitoring.  I can see
that it would be a lot easier to know your buddy hasn't picked up the
regulator leading to a deadly mix if you know exactly where each mix is.
The labeling standards for multiple tanks is also a "consistency issue," but
not one necessarily in the scope of our discussion.  Personally, I feal that
even the specific location, operation, etc. of inflators, regulators and
such might be something that would benefit from consistency.  The question,
of course, is how much benefit and how much is that benefit worth.  To each
his own.

> That was in fact given as the PRIMARY (if not the ONLY) reason for
> the "consistency" (or one configurations fits all) in an article
> written by Carl Shrieves (? who is supposed to be the High Priest of
> DIR ?) in Alert Diver article on the DIR topic.

Interesting.  I'm not a long term follower of DIR.  In fact, as followers
go, I'm a very recent convert.  Carl Shrieves name has not been mentioned by
the supporters I read (few) or their critics (many).  Some things that
support consistency have other reasons.  I was in the Halcyon shop the other
day and talking to Robert Carmichael, the owner of Halcyon and Brownies.  He
mentioned that the depth guage (computer in my case) goes on the right wrist
and the compass goes on the left.  I saw little reason for a rule like this
until he explained.  Scooter controls are on the right side and those that
use them always have their right hand on the scooter and in plain sight.
Since he is always concerned about depth and only sometimes concerned about
direction, the depth guage/computers goes where it will always be in view.
Lots of things in the system make sense when you learn the reasons behind
them.

> >I'm with you.  Dive what you are most comfortable and safe with and
respect the
> >right of others to do the same.
>
> Did I say that?   I believe ONLY in self-responsibility and self-reliance!

Perhaps not this time, but in years of posts, that's a message I heard.  I
can't think of anyone I think is more likely to support informed personal
decisions or to insist on the right to make personal risk decisions of your
own.  If the two statements don't come out to the same meaning, fix
whichever you like to make a match.

> Which means -- if someone wants to dive with UNcomfortable and UNsafe
> gears, it's okay with ME.  It's THEIR business.  :-)

Hmmm.  This implies that you don't care, and I'm almost 100% certain you do,
but I think I know what you mean.  Since I said (not exactly intentionally)
"Dive what YOU . . ."  I'll take credit for saying that you, who I do care
about, should chose what you are most comfortable and safe with (which I
know you'll do anyway).  Nevermind.  The fact is that I didn't even consider
the perspective of "do whatever you want, I don't care."  It's not mine and
I don't think it's yours.

> That reminded me of a Hogarthian "discussion" I had with "Snarls" years
> ago in which he argued that the DRYSUIT (in Hogarthian, now DIR)
> configuration SHOULD be used, EVEN diving in Cozumel -- as his
> interpretation of the bible.

Now that must have been an interesting discussion.  Hogarthian started out
as the least that will do is probably best.  DIR started out that way too,
but seems to have evolved into "this way is the only way," at least until
recently.  I was very surprised to see a George Irvine post that
contradicted the "this way is the only way" that had been so loudly stated
by so many of his followers.

> The fact that the drysuit has never been seen in Cozumel and that
> no manufacturer has yet produced a drysuit with an air-conditioning
> unit inside are mere minor details that are beside the point.  <BWG>

BWG too.

Lee