Time for a new forum?

[TSandM]

We do not need a precise, objective legal definition of what is, or isn't DIR. Its perfectly fine to have DIR become a fuzzy concept, incorporating GUE, WKPP, and even AG/5th-D NAUI stuff, x-scooters or gavins, long hose over or under, that's all good. We all dive as a team, we all use the long hose, we all go for the right post first, we all deco horizontally. In the venn diagram over the set of all possible scuba practices there is a set which is definitely DIR, there is a very narrow set of fuzziness and there a huge big swath which is not-DIR.

My sentiments exactly.

 

[rjack321]

One other issue here is that threads never close. So even once a question has been properly answered a bunch of "that's not the only way" hand grenades get lobbed in and the rest of the thread (usually dozens to 100s of posts) spends its time debunking those clearly non-DIR alternatives.

And no, you can't be DIR without at least one class.

 

[Kevrumbo]

Then how can someone distinguish between what is GUE DIR, ABC DIR, etc, or even know what answer they are looking for? I'm sure there are things that are DIR for other groups, that isn't DIR for GUE.

Exactly and that's why keep the Forum open as is, status quo. Compare, contrast, discuss, determine the compatibilities of the various "DIR Systems" (GUE-F; 5thD-X; Hogarth; CCR etc.).

The most "liberal" interpretation, the widest inductive statement for DIR is:
"All best practices that facilitate the Fit, Form and Function of a Unified Dive Team."

Now discuss and deduce the merits of how that applies for the particular question or issue at hand. . .

 

[Blox]

And no, you can't be DIR without at least one class.

An honest question: Don't you think, that one could be diving DIR without a class, but instead being (having been) mentored by an experienced DIR diver?

 

[TSandM]

Well, I don't presume to speak for rjack, but I think he meant you can't be a DIR diver just from reading the books, watching the videos, and following the DIR threads on the internet.

I'm quite sure that a couple of solid DIR guys could mentor somebody who was willing to do the reading to get the intellectual information into a pretty good DIR diver at the Fundies level. I think it would be pretty hard to produce a Tech 1 or Cave 1 diver without some instruction.

 

[Blox]

TSandM,

Thanks - well considered reply, as always.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47 777 (1935).

N. Bohr, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?, Phys. Rev. 48, 696 (1935)

J.S. Bell: "On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox" Physics 1 #3, 195 (1964).

A. Aspect, Dalibard, G. Roger: "Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers" Physical Review Letters 49 #25, 1804 (20 Dec 1982).

all of them and more i believe are available in:

http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Physics/dp/0691083169

Thank you, Lamont, my vast appreciation as always.

Doc

 

[Doc Intrepid]

One other issue here is that threads never close. So even once a question has been properly answered a bunch of "that's not the only way" hand grenades get lobbed in and the rest of the thread (usually dozens to 100s of posts) spends its time debunking those clearly non-DIR alternatives.

One of the cool things about setting up a forum to meet specific interests is that you can make it so it does specific things.

If the general sentiment is that at thread should close after, say, a month or more of inactivity we can set the forum up to do this - either automatically or by requesting that a mod close it.

The DIR forum is an evolving thing that can be tweaked to best meet the user's needs (within software constraints, management requirements, etc.). IMHO the point is that improving it will require some thoughtful review, and a bit of analytical foresight.

It may not ever please everyone, but we can work towards incremental improvement.

 

[*Floater*]

I say split the DIR forum into the DIR purists section (with strict enforcement of rules) and the DIR "strokes" (or drokes) section, and let's see where everyone ends up posting...

Obviously if someone is clearly trolling their posts should be deleted, but some of the time it seems that purist DIR divers don't have the patience to debate DIR details with those who are DIR-curious but with doubts. And having a few anti-DIR posters in the mix is fine too because it forces the proponents of DIR to argue their case more extensively which I assume can be of value to those readers considering DIR.

 

[lamont]

I say split the DIR forum into the DIR purists section (with strict enforcement of rules) and the DIR "strokes" (or drokes) section, and let's see where everyone ends up posting...

Obviously if someone is clearly trolling their posts should be deleted, but some of the time it seems that purist DIR divers don't have the patience to debate DIR details with those who are DIR-curious but with doubts. And having a few anti-DIR posters in the mix is fine too because it forces the proponents of DIR to argue their case more extensively which I assume can be of value to those readers considering DIR.

This is why people like Bob Sherwood don't bother to post here. He doesn't need to waste his time "arguing his case more extensively."

And where exactly is the charter of this forum which specifies that the purpose of it is to endlessly cross-examine proponents of DIR about the minutia of DIR? I know a lot of anti-DIR posters believe that's what its purpose should be, but most of the "proponents of DIR" have become tired of that game.

To be useful this forum should be about DIR and DIR divers. For the readers that aren't DIR, if this offends you, try to realize that not everything in life is about you.

And should I start posting in the solo forum trying to get the solo divers to argue their case more extensively? A DIR invasion of the solo forum could probably make that forum completely useless, just like this one...