Input on our Accident and Incidents Forum... What do you want? How do you want it?

[lowviz]

...//... While we're at it, the mods usually nominate new mods, but we can always take suggestions. Just not yourself. Never, ever nominate yourself and don't ask anyone to nominate yourself either. ...

Some really serious illogic here. Not that I really care.

I want to be a mod! Somebody, please nominate me! (That should do it, I'm safe.)

...//...If you want to be a mod, you're probably not suited to be one

not thinking rationally.

 

[Storker]

Somebody, please nominate me! (That should do it, I'm safe.)

Yes. Yes, you are. Congratulations. You'll never be a mod. Thank your favorite deity for that.

 

[sunnyboy]

"
...
I wouldn't comment on a rebreather incident/accident, because beyond a basic idea of the operation and procedures, I have no idea what it would involve.

Thank you for that. However, there are far too many who start their wild-a** speculation with "well, I never dove a rebreather and don't know how they work or anything, but it seems to me that what happened is ..."

You can replace rebreather with almost any technical specialty that involves a lot of extra training and practice and skill.

The thing is, these "extreme" types of dive require a multitude of specialty skills, knowledge and dives to become proficient. If you don't understand it and don't do it, everything about the dive can look "fishy". But speculating about it and inventing dumb-a** scenarios really does increase the noise-to-signal in the A&I threads involving such dives. IMO.

It's the one case where I'd love to see more moderation - *when noobs speculate*. ;-)

 

[Johnoly]

....to keep his mouth shut which meant he would have been unable to defend himself on the public forum...

Sometimes it takes work to get your side of the story out and do it correctly (here & other forum's). Some of us MAYBE have helped do this in past incidents. It's starts with the 'involved party' or other source with inside knowledge, and they VERBALLY call another forum member with details. That member then verbally contacts a 3rd member willing to post the details. If done correctly, it now becomes "heresay" and the posting party is disconnected from the involved party. The fine details will authenticate the story.

Want your side of the story put out there? It's MAYBE has been done already by a single message count poster.

 

[gcarter]

A&I should be a very important forum. It should be a place where news of accidents can be shared with the intent of learning from these incidents.
What it should not be is where we call victims "stupid" or make completely uninformed statements about the cause of an accident. Balmecasting, wishcasting and such just don't belong.

I'm an investigator and from time to time investigate dive related incidents and I would like the forum to be more useful.
Maybe set the forum up so only an approved group of SB members can post but all can view? That way we might keep the useless comments out?

For that matter, I'd be happy to help with the forum

Basis for approval? Sounds like a clique. Starting with exclusion smacks of elitism.

I think the current in by default, need a basis for banning is less problematic even if it can get uncomfortable from time to time.

 

[gcarter]

But I really don't like when something bad happens and people with little training or experience in an area start to imagine what they would have done differently so that they would have been OK. Call it a pet peeve.

A peeve of yours it may be, but it can be enormously useful as a learning tool. Those "with little training or experience in an area" can challenge assumptions with what might be considered naive questions. It can be important to their learning, and help those with more experience think outside the box of their established assumptions.

A peeve of mine is those who think that there are people they can't learn anything from

 

[gcarter]

.....

Yeah, ok. I guess you'd like controlled reporting. I stand by my earlier explanation...

People can read or not read threads as they choose. I personally appreciate what you do.

 

[gcarter]

I was forwarded a note from someone who does accident analysis... only they've stopped calling them "accidents". The whole point of the note was to point out that the word "accident" trivializes the incident as something out of our control. Consequently, I've asked my Google Guru, @sphyon, to assess the impact a change of name would have on the forum. Maybe we need to call it something like "Scuba Incidents", "Scuba Incidents and Injuries" or even "Scuba Incidents, injuries and deaths". I'm sure I would still be keeping "accidents" as a Key Word for the forum. Comments?

Pfft. Real people in real life know what "accident" means when they use it and when they hear it. I think it is fair to say that when you look at the path some of the threads take, it is pretty clear that the use of the word "accident" most decidedly does not result in the trivialization of an event or in it being characterized as a foregone inevitability beyond the power of mere mortals to avoid.

Having said that, I would have no issue with calling it "Scuba Incidents, injuries and deaths". I just think the reasoning is nonsense.

 

[oya]

A peeve of yours it may be, but it can be enormously useful as a learning tool.

Of an accident where few hard details are known:
"That diver died because they weren't wearing their snorkel. That's why I ALWAYS wear my snorkel just like we learned in Open Water."

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about.

 

[FinnMom]

Are you certain about that? I, for one, have learned quite a bit also from reported incidents where those with 1st hand knowledge weren't participating in the threads. The first that springs to my mind is the thread about the Plura cave diving fatalities.

I agree that those with 1st hand knowledge are not likely to be abe to post.
If you are very close to the incident, the police, other investigators or at least an insurance rep is likely to make it very clear that under no circumstances are you to discuss the matter. If you are not an official witness but close to the incident in some way, telling the general public about something painful in the lives of those you know and care about probably doesn't seem like appropriate behavior.

At the very sunniest view it's still got some definite potential to go badly, in some way, with at least some people. Even if you disclose minimal information and your facts are 110% accurate, someone is bound to be offended by your tone, or simply by the fact that you fed/incouraged the onlookers in any way when famiies often wish the rest of the world would hush/butt out/go away.
(BTW no, I do not have anything against the accident forums, quite the opposite. Those near & dear to victims just need to heed and believe the warnings, those furums are not a good place for them)

So good information is of course great to have, but not all that simple to obtain.
Nowadays it would occur to me to offer information through a MOD, but as an ordinary SBoard user that would never have occurred to me.