How would you handle this?

[DaleC]

This is really about communities and their expectations of behavior. When we move from one community to another we sometimes find that the behavior in one doesn't fit the expectations in another.

These appear to be young men who are from a HS/college community of buddies who don't appear to object to any kind of behavior. As hunters they appear to have learned nothing more from that community other than to have the right tags. Now they have taken those values and entered the recreational diving community - Pow!

It is probably legal to BBQ and eat a dog at an American beach but most people know that it will get people riled up. If they don't I sure hope someone would clue them in (like Bob did). Patting that person on the back and reaffirming their strict legal right to do what they are doing isn't really going to help that person fit in at the beach. It will just cripple them socially with kindness.

It would be nice if those two young men could grow to become responsible hunters, and responsible divers. It's possible if they are able to connect the consequences to the action. But if they are to do so they need to learn what is expected from them by both communities.

Are cultural norms a legality? No. Are they a reality? Yes.

The people who keep justifying the "rights" may be correct in a legal sense but they are not helping those boys in any real sense. They are just continuing to keep them trapped in a cycle of perpetual pariahhood from the community they appear to want to enter.

 

[Rooster In Ohio]

This is really about communities and their expectations of behavior. When we move from one community to another we sometimes find that the behavior in one doesn't fit the expectations in another.

These appear to be young men who are from a HS/college community of buddies who don't appear to object to any kind of behavior. As hunters they appear to have learned nothing more from that community other than to have the right tags. Now they have taken those values and entered the recreational diving community - Pow!

It is probably legal to BBQ and eat a dog at an American beach but most people know that it will get people riled up. If they don't I sure hope someone would clue them in (like Bob did). Patting that person on the back and reaffirming their strict legal right to do what they are doing isn't really going to help that person fit in at the beach. It will just cripple them socially with kindness.

It would be nice if those two young men could grow to become responsible hunters, and responsible divers. It's possible if they are able to connect the consequences to the action. But if they are to do so they need to learn what is expected from them by both communities.

Are cultural norms a legality? No. Are they a reality? Yes.

The people who keep justifying the "rights" may be correct in a legal sense but they are not helping those boys in any real sense. They are just continuing to keep them trapped in a cycle of perpetual pariahhood from the community they appear to want to enter.

Dale, I can't help but think that you are trying to spin my response so, in a last post to this thread, and after having now read the entire thread and a bit of the NW Divers thread Zen linked to, I offer a counter view and renew my suggestion:

1. The young man/men in question is/are one of us: divers.

2. Two apparently novice divers did what we all preach: they went diving as buddies in conditions within their training and experience: a diving area that happens to be supported by improvements created with tax dollars for all divers.

3. The diver in question obtained the necessary license to take the animal.

4. The diver took one animal (this fact seems to be lost: he took ONE animal ONE time).

5. B(GD) confronted the diver. None of us other than those actually standing in earshot know what was said, but it appears the diver has expressed some regret.

6. A social media press ensued against the diver that took the one animal (apparently confirmed to be a male that was not protecting eggs, baby seals, or kittens). Query this: if the diver was your 16 year old daughter or son and the social media press was initiated by another 16 year old attending the same highschool, who among us would have not moved heaven and earth to bring it and the poster down? The ends does not justify the means, people, it just doesn't.

7. Brother and sister divers advocated everything from murdering this diver by lynching him, giving him a 10% fill, or taking other action below the surface, to commiting felony criminal mischief against his property while he was submerged, to turning him in for MIP based on a facebook post. Again, all over one animal a brother diver had the right to harvest and apparently didn't know the unwritten law against hunting at this partularl location.

8. The issue raised by this diver's action in taking this animal is this: whose dive site is it? Does it belong to all divers or should novice divers that want to hunt be relegated to other dive sites (that don't have the nice ammenities that my tax dollars paid for (I lived in Seattle when these were built) and which may not conform to the edict that he dive within his level of comfort and experience)?

In closing, it may be the unspoken rule that this dive site is reserved to tourists and novices. If so, speak it. That's what I suggested. Of course, there is more than one way to communicate (hence my response to your new thread, Dale). If speaking is not enough and enough people feel the same way, then go ahead and use the legislative process to deny our hunting brother and sister divers from accessing this site. Just remember that someday the masses may not like your new hobby, either.

But I will say this: shame on anyone that advocates harming any diver or his property over something that does not involve death or physical injury to another diver. And think about this - how would you feel if someone digs up your identity and forwards your post advocating the same to your employer, your favorite dive shop, your dive club, etc.? I'll bet you would say that you didn't really mean it and just posted it in the heat of the moment without thinking.

I'll bet the young diver that had words with Bob would tell us that he said things in the heat of the moment, wishes he hadn't, and will not hunt at this location in the future. In fact, I think he has.

My $0.02.

Respectfully submitted,

db

 

[boat sju]

Kind of disappointing that I just found myself adding a diver/poster, that I had the utmost respect for, to my ignore list because he found it acceptable to harass another diver who was hunting legally. If you don't like the law work to change it.

Here in Michigan we have laws against harassing hunters.

 

[letterboy]

its not harassment, if I saw it on FB, SB, Spearboard, Myspace, Google+ etc is it? ohh wait, then it is "cyber bulling" . . .

 

[boulderjohn]

This is really about communities and their expectations of behavior. W

The point was, you govern yourself by law alone.

This thread would be an excellent opportunity for a sociologist to teach the concepts that Ferdinand Tonnies developed about 100 years ago. Check out this brief description of the difference between gemeinschaft and gesellschaft and ask yourself if it does not precisely describe this conflict. To summarize in a highly simplified way, a community is a group governed by norms of behavior by which they agree to live. A society has specific laws that must be obeyed. When you mix them, you have problems.

An example of such a mixture is ScubaBoard. In general, we try to live as a community with norms that translate essentially as "be nice and respectful to each other when you disagree." We also have ToS that specify certain behaviors that are not allowed. The ToS are more characteristic of a society than a community. The problem is that the ToS, like laws, cannot possibly anticipate every specific possibility of poor behavior. Thus, we often have people who are being rude and disrespectful, clearly in violation of the norms of the community, when they post. When those posts are moderated, we frequently get an angry response telling us that what they wrote is not clearly and specifically prohibited in the ToS.

That's essentially what happened here. The community said "What you did violates the norms by which we live," and the the individual responded "tough cookies--it's not against the law."

 

[lowviz]

...//... That's essentially what happened here. The community said "What you did violates the norms by which we live," and the the individual responded "tough cookies--it's not against the law."

Which is where the education part should kick in...

 

[WeldonDowd]

This escalated further than it should have due to people acting on their emotions rather than logic and reason. Because of that, their will be more limits imposed. We have taken another freedom from the people because a group was blinded by their own emotions. The tone of the original poster has changed a bit in the more recent posts about this situation and I believe he may have some remorse about the way he handled it; I certainly hope so.

 

[boulderjohn]

This escalated further than it should have due to people acting on their emotions rather than logic and reason. Because of that, their will be more limits imposed. We have taken another freedom from the people because a group was blinded by their own emotions.

Tonnies would say that when individuals violate the norms of the community and indicate that the norms will be violated in the future, then the community will have to resort to laws instead of norms. Whenever that happens, the concept of a community is further and further eroded.

IMO, living in a norm based society is always better, until you have members who refuse to abide by those rules. To give you an example from history/literature, the culture described in Homer's Odyssey is a norm-based community. There are no laws there whatsoever. The idea that Odysseus is a "king" is a mistake brought on by the fact that our language has no equivalent to what he actually was. When the suitors in his home refuse to conform to the norms of that community (themis), there is nothing that can be done legally to stop them. They thus represent the breakdown of that community, and Odysseus has no choice but to kill them. People today see it as an overreaction because they don't understand that the culture of the time allowed no other choice. I see a real similarity here. When an individual refuses to conform to community norms, then the community has to find a way to deal with that.

 

[boat sju]

Interesting article John. Community vs. Society conflicts can quickly become very dangerous. What happens when an outsider wanders into the wrong gang's neighborhood, eh?

 

[Ana]

Wow, save the drama for your mama. Can you discuss a topic rationally or do you always resort to hyperbole?

I didn't say anything about lynching or going over to his house so don't put words in my mouth. Also, why the sarcasm about the efforts to make GPO's safe at Cove 2; should no one take action about anything they care about for fear of upsetting someone else? Talk about a rallying cry for the lame. Nobody burned anybody at the stake either so you can relax there too. I would also suggest you refrain from suggesting we blow the Japanese out of the planet and/or destroy them - that might be misinterpreted as war mongering and open you up to some sort of international charge. And yes, that person was one of us - and unless you want government control over diving it is up to the dive community to govern itself-which is what it has done. The message being: don't harvest GPO's at Cove 2 and expect service or friendship. That behavior pisses people off. Is the recreational diving community allowed to express that message or not.

I don't know about showing you the correct path, but I sure found it frustrating to have to go through and correct your post. Try to do that yourself next time. Spreading half truths and innuendo is what you're complaining about.. right?

I'm not trying to insert drama. I don't even disagree with stopping the harvesting of GPOs on that location.

On and off for the last 10 years I've read posts from NWGDiver (Bob) and mostly agree with his stance on diving and even some of his views in general, so is nothing to do with him personally. With that said, Bob did not like this punk messing on his playground, and decided to put a stop to that. He could have use many approaches, but since the punk didn't react the way he wanted and called him an A_Hole, he decided to show how big of an A_Hole he can be (his words not mine) Right there is when I believe things went very wrong.

A concept about the "uniform" this kid presents was brought up as a tool to judge him, I would use that tool if the kid was to marry into my family or if I have to somehow interact with him on a regular basis but that's not the case here, is it?

Sarcasm about saving he Cove 2? Yes I was sarcastic, but who is being dramatic here? "SAVING" the Cove from a guy that got a fishing license and took ONE octopus, just as he was allowed to do. That's not drama?

Weather the catch is male or female does not seem to be clear, I hate to think the kid took a female.... I also hate people that slam on the brakes at the beginning of a merging lane, I strongly feel it is highly unsafe to do that, but I have to deal with that reality.

Don't tell me no one was burned at the stake, because this kid was bullied to submission. I don't know the exact sequence of events, but the bulling started before anyone saw his so called "uniform" .....what if after the ID is exposed in the freaking web turned out that, he was just kid with a big mouth that really like to eat octopus, nothing more nothing less. By then things were already out, people were "outrage" and ready to get blood, the damage was done.

I like to eat octopus, I have a big mouth too, and I follow the law when it comes to harvest food, I like to think I'm an ethical harvester but some may disagree with me. So is it up to me to know every "unwritten rule"? . Honestly I find it amusing that every one say, go hunt 200 yards that way, but not here. What about the divers 200 yards that way? Never mind the "people" that dive 200 yards that way, what about the GPO's 200 yards away? are they the red-headed GPO's? , that's what all this is about, protecting the GPO's isn't it? .... or is it more on the lines of: I've been coming to this "public" place for many many years and I care deeply for it and no one is going to do something I feel is not appropriate, it may be public grounds and it may be legal but I know better... nah it wouldn't be that.


Whatever, that's the NW part of the country and I live in the SE so I don't have a clue about that cove or the GPO's in question, but I do know a little about following fishing/harvesting rules, and I also understand the philosophy of just because it is allowed it doesn't mean that I can do it, but that only applies to me, I decided that even if it is allowed to collect both claws from a stone crab I will only take one from each animal. But I can't stop someone else from taking both. I may talk to a person taking both claws and try to change their mind, and if they mouth me off bad enough I may wish a$$ cancer on them, but I will not find their names and publish their info and call on all crab lovers I know to "SHOW HIM" how much of an A-Hole I can be..... again, is the bullying that can't be acceptable, the end does not justify the means. And here it is being glorify.

I don't know what are you correcting about my post, I stated my opinions, are you correcting my opinions? no wonder you found that a frustrating exercise,that's extremely amusing