GUE Tech 1

[Spectre]

chrpai once bubbled...
Now I might accept Roakey's point, if that is what he actually said. But it wasn't. He clearly stated that there wasn't any chance you'd get someone bad from GUE.

Well, in all honesty, I believe that from everything I've heard, but of course I've never taken a class from them, and in fact I've only met a couple of GUE instructors and I've not talked to them about instructing... so I really can't make that claim.

Roakey is definately more experienced than I with the GUE instructors. But I have to admit that I've heard about bad instructors from every agency except GUE [well, there might be a few of the smaller agencies that I don't have second hand knowledge of any of the instructors]...

But basically, the argument against roakey here seems to [now] boil down to be that there are possibly bad GUE instructors... but I don't see anyone here that can claim this with first, or even second hand knowledge.

 

[chrpai]

Spectre once bubbled...

But basically, the argument against roakey here seems to [now] boil down to be that there are possibly bad GUE instructors... but I don't see anyone here that can claim this with first, or even second hand knowledge.

He made the claim, it should be up to him to prove it, not up to us to disprove it.

I still stand by my statement of:

"Have you personally evaluated every single instructor that GUE has? If not, how can you make the guarantee?"

 

[chrpai]

roakey once bubbled...

You can't rely on the instructor, because even the bad ones (maybe *especially* the bad ones) think they walk on water.

I know this is late, but I just noticed this comment. I'm not going to say much, but everyone play with this one in their mind for a little bit and see where you take yourself with it.

We could all learn from it, I believe.

 

[cornfed]

Spectre once bubbled...

Roakey's point is just being missed by everyone. He's not blanket bashing. He's pointing out that if you blindly choose an instructor from any agency, there is a chance you'll get someone that isn't any good.

I'm well aware of what is point is. I'm not debating the instructor quality issue. I simply stated that it's ironic for him to complain about the replies when he opened the can of worms to begin with.

 

[cornfed]

chrpai once bubbled...
He made the claim, it should be up to him to prove it, not up to us to disprove it.

Proofs like this are a two way street.

Someone makes a claim based on evidence they have. Based on this evidence, you can either accept it or not. If you refute the claim it becomes your burden to disprove it.

 

[roakey]

cornfed once bubbled...
Someone makes a claim based on evidence they have. Based on this evidence, you can either accept it or not. If you refute the claim it becomes your burden to disprove it.

Actually it's even simplier than this, you can't prove a negative, that's logic 101.

I can't prove that there isn't a bad instructor, it can only be proved that there IS a bad GUE instructor. That's up to the person making the assertion, charpi?

Given the small number of GUE instructors, I think we've got on the order of 90% coverage of them in this file from various people. Except for one personality conflict that I know of, reports have been 100% positive.

If you won't listen to me, at least listen to Spectre, his observation perhaps will encourage you to go back and read what I wrote and see that I pick my words very carefully, but despite my best attempts, a number of you (dare I say most?) have completely missed the point.

Roak

 

[wb416]

dsgobie once bubbled...
I've been searching the board for any information on this course. I can't find anything. The DIR/fund class is beat to death, but I would like to hear from anyone who has taken this course.

What were your experiences?

Would you recommend it?

If you could do it over, would you use another agency?

Did you get what you expected out of the course?


ds

DS,
Since the signal-to-noise ratio has made this thread worthless and furthermore, since those "adding" the most to your thread don't seem to have taken the class, PM me. I'll try to answer any question you may have based on having actually taken and passed the Tech 1 class, and it won't get lost in the din.

bob

 

[roakey]

You made me go off and gather a couple datapoints...

I have classroom experience with over 15% of the GUE instructors worldwide, which translates to over 26% of the instructors located in the United States.

If you include meeting and talking to GUE instructors, those numbers jump to about 22% and 37%.

If you're calling on me to defend GUE, anyone care to figure out what % of instructors you know from the other agencies? Is it staistically significant enough that you can draw a reasonable conclusion as to the agency's overall level of quality?

Roak

 

[Uncle Pug]

dsgobie once bubbled...
1. What were your experiences?

2. Would you recommend it?

3. If you could do it over, would you use another agency?

4. Did you get what you expected out of the course?

1. Too much for me to include in this post... it was not a piece of cake... but we came out the other side confident in our ability to not only do the dives but work through the one that might end up going sideways.

2. Yes... but only for those with the skill sets of DIRf down pat.

3. No.

4. Far more than I could have forseen.

 

[d33ps1x]

I wonder how many people other than myself see all this crap going on between the GUE and EVERYONEELSE crowds and says F($( it.

All this BS can and does really turn people off.

It doesn't just happen on msg boards either. These people act like this in real life too. In dive shops, on boats, and shorelines everywhere.

The bizarre thing is that most of the GUE, PADI, NAUI, SSI, etc, professionals I've seen out there seem reasonably well socially adapted.

It seems to be more a large population of end users that have this incapability to get along and a seemingly un-ending ability to volly back and forth the same stupid arguements over and over.

All I can figure is diving attracts more than its fair share of nitpicky, smartassed, argumentative a(*hol#s. There must be something about the sport/pasttime/lifestyle/whatever that strikes their fancy.

I actually would be interested in taking a DIR-F course if I could stomach being in a store that offers it long enough to fill out the paperwork. Unfortunately usually some holier than though I.T. nerd idiot with a pair of Jetfins sneers at me walking through the front door and gives me that "I've done my tech1 and from the look of you you haven't found [insert deity here] CHOICES: God/Jarrod/ or George) yet..." look followed by some dumb assed comment about my obviously uneducated gear configuration.

At this point I usually have the option of either pistol whipping the arrogant little GUE disciple with his own spring straps or leaving the shop. I almost always choose the latter.

With that said I think for now I will stick to reading the GUE manuals that are available and learning what I can from them. Lots of really great points that have already made a difference in my diving I believe.

I own and have read DIR-F, am reading TECH1 and soon will read CAVE1 manuals. I really wish I could stomach your "culture" long enough to step near a course but I really can't stand the unusual number of whiney, pissy, sneering, insecure little buggers I've met along the way.

I have met mamny "DIR" pracitioners there who are unassuming, level headed people who's company I quite enjoy, so I know they exist. Sadly surprisingly not enough to offset the balance.

Who knows. Maybe I'll save up enough to take the course one on one if it's offered to avoid the kool-aid crowd. Until then forget it.

To clarify. I'm simply flat out disillusioned with the culture surrounding what seems a very solid diving concept. One that I have a great deal of interest in and enthusiasm for but has been made downright inaccessible to me due to my low level of tolerance for assoholics.

If some people are wondering why the DIR revolution has yet to come maybe a hint might be in the attitudes of some of the people representing it.