Is It Time For A DIR Forum???

[AquaTec]

I think it is good to have the same topic discussed over again once in a while, there are always new people on the board and their input may shed new light on a subject..

I find the people who complain and send you off to a previous thread are usualy the same people whos answer is usualy

"because it is the DIR way"...you see, there is no reason to discuss ways of doing things, you simply look it up in the manual or ask another DIR diver and do it that way.

i believe open discution on the same old subjects brings new energy and maybe new ideas and better ways of doing something

so keeping bring up stuff that was posted previously and see who has something new to say.

 

[jonnythan]

AquaTec once bubbled...
I find the people who complain and send you off to a previous thread are usualy the same people whos answer is usualy

"because it is the DIR way"...you see, there is no reason to discuss ways of doing things, you simply look it up in the manual or ask another DIR diver and do it that way.

You know, I don't think I've ever seen anyone give that answer for anything.

Quit spreading lies. If you like a certain way of doing something, post in the thread and explain your reasoning. The DIR people I see in this forum tend to do the same.

 

[AquaTec]

jonnythan once bubbled...


You know, I don't think I've ever seen anyone give that answer for anything.

Quit spreading lies. If you like a certain way of doing something, post in the thread and explain your reasoning. The DIR people I see in this forum tend to do the same.

I probably shouldn't have used quotes on that statement, i meant that is offten the answer, I have had it said to me that way after prompting for a reasonable explinasion as to why something is done a certain way.

all i am trying to say is I would preffer to have discusions even if they have been discussed before, open to furthjer discusion as opposed to being given a link and a nasty comment.

[note; i did try and do a search on that quote, but this system doesn't seem to support that type of search]

lets not make this about DIR, i will retract my statement as i am the one who through that example out there, its just a good example. the real issue was wether or not to rehash old conversations

 

[roakey]

AquaTec once bubbled...
[note; i did try and do a search on that quote, but this system doesn’t seem to support that type of search]

The reason you didn’t find it is because it hasn’t been said. There’s a reason behind EVERYTHING in DIR, but the folks who fear the system refuse to accept this. It’s a handy excuse for them not to look at the system objectively. Wack-a-mole again. If DIR did half the things that the anti-DIR folks claim we do, I’d hate the system too. Problem is, your oft-repeated claims (marketing ploy, cult, “because George does it” etc.) are all just figments of your imagination. If you want to discuss the WHYs behind something, ask why. If you want to complain about imaginary problems with the system, don’t waste our time.

AquaTec once bubbled...
lets not make this about DIR, i will retract my statement as i am the one who through that example out there, its just a good example. the real issue was wether or not to rehash old conversations

“I retract my statement” followed by “its [sic] just a good example”

That’s rich. Retracted for exactly 16 words. Congratulations, that’s longer than most of the bashers.

You stated “Its [sic] often the answer” Then show us I donno, maybe 10 entries where it’s the answer. Should be a piece of cake if it’s “often” as you claim. Even easier since “I have had it said to me…”

AquaTec once bubbled...
the real issue was wether or not to rehash old conversations

The real issue is using this board the way the software folks designed it to be used. If you want to dredge up an old note post a reply to that note; even if it’s ancient, it’ll pop right to the top and become a current note. I’ve done this several times to readdress an old topic. It works great as well as not fragmenting information all over the board as it appears that you’re a proponent of…

Roak

 

[jamespitt]

roakey,
i respect your position as a diver and as a source of information, but i really wish people would not point out studip little spelling and grammatical errors, like you did by adding in (sic).

I retract my statement” followed by “its [sic] just a good example”

and if yure going to be splitting ball hairs, pls just read your posts and avoid saying it's instead of its. it's means "it is" and doesnt represent ownership.

If you want to dredge up an old note post a reply to that note; even if it’s ancient, it’ll pop right to the top and become a current note.

what if the guy is not even english?? - this is a source of diving information and not a english language forum.
i couldnt really be bothered to read this whole post but just hate it when it resorts to pointing out others mistakes.

jp

 

[metridium]

jamespitt wrote...
i couldnt really be bothered to read this whole post but just hate it when it resorts to pointing out others mistakes.

Hey, he just used "sic". It's not as if he observed that the guy's almost incomprehensible....

 

[jamespitt]

he could be a frenchie... who knows???
its just the use of [sic]. its like saying,"ooo here is a quote from you, but i will add a little dig cos you cant spell for ****".
i mean who really GAF on the correct use of its or it's, english is difficult enough without worrying about 2 and 3 letter words.

but i do agree that his post is a little difficult to understand...

 

[metridium]

jamespitt wrote...
he could be a frenchie... who knows???

Sacre Bleu! Surely not!

jamespitt wrote...
but i do agree that his post is a little difficult to understand...

On a serious note:

Kudos to the Australian government for Heard and McDonald!!! Very impressive, foresighted, and generous!

 

[jamespitt]

metridium,
sorry but as a saffer (sorry south african) in oz, i dont follow as much as i should - but i suspect yr post is somewhat tongue firmly in cheek. from what i know heard and macdonald is an antarctic island?? and thats about it. so what has the rotten government done now??
cheers,
JP

 

[roakey]

<This reply intentionally left blank>