It should be noted that the paper John submitted to PADI and the ensuing discussion became the impetus for the changes that lead to the new OW standard. Yes, it started right here on Scubaboard.
Yes and no. The difference is actually an important point.
I picked the people I wanted to have participate in the discussions from what I saw people post on ScubaBoard. I wanted a pretty large group with diverse experiences covering a wide geographical area--I managed to get almost all the continents. I wanted people with different areas of expertise. For example, I included Dr. Sam Miller for his expertise on the history of dive instruction. All the names of the people I invited were people I encountered on ScubaBoard. The discussions that led to the article, however, did not take place on ScubaBoard, and the reason why is important to this discussion.
If you do a search for scuba discussion forums, you will see that there are quite a few that have very little participation. I picked one of those forums and selected the Instructor to Instructor portion of that forum. I invited everyone to join that forum, and we discussed the concept there. It was in plain sight, but hidden by the fact that no one else went there. In fact, when I revisited the site a year after our article was published, I saw that no one else had even viewed the discussion, let alone tried to participate. Thus, we essentially had our own private site, and I cautioned everyone to keep it that way.
Why?
ScubaBoard had (and still has) a number of active participants I very pointedly did NOT want involved. I knew that if they got wind of it, they would interfere with those efforts to the best of their ability. I'm pretty sure I was right, and if you were to do a search on ScubaBoard for the discussions that took place AFTER we published the article, you would see why. Even though PADI published our article, and even after PADI Technical Director Karl Shreeves became involved as a co-author of the article, people were posting
extremely aggressive posts saying that teaching that way was a violation of PADI standards, and any instructor who did what we suggested risked being expelled. I would say that many of those posts were on the edge of lunacy, but the truth is I thought they were over the edge. Imagine what would have happened if we had had the discussion here BEFORE writing the article!
So here's my point: the greatest obstacle to teaching the way we advocated in that article is interference by those who are opposed to it. Why are they opposed to it? I will now differentiate between the positions of the two opposing camps in this debate, admitting that there will be some hyperbole and sarcasm in the description.
Typical Proponent Argument: I learned diving skills, and I learned to teach diving skills, while on the knees. At some point, I became curious about neutral teaching, and I started trying it. The difference was amazing! I found students learned faster, they were more comfortable, and they finished the pool sessions looking like seasoned divers. The difference between the two methods is simply huge, and I can never go back to my old on-the-knees method.
Typical Opponent Argument: I learned diving skills, and I learned to teach diving skills, while on the knees. I have never seen it done neutrally, but my powers of imagination are so incredible that I can tell exactly what it would be like. I know students will not be comfortable, they will have trouble learning the skills, and it will all take much too long. What I imagine it must look like is so horrible that I will do everything in my power to make sure this does not happen in the places where I teach.