It's
now very straightforward to me as well. But to my amazement, that other thread shows that there is a wide range of opinions on whether to do safety stops, whether to search for one minute or longer at depth, and so forth.
Perhaps the question ought to have been worded "What search plan should you and your buddies agree on before the dive? Do you agree to search in the holds? Do you agree to search under the wreck? Do you agree to ascend following normal protocol or faster? Do you wait at the line after searching, and if so for how long?" and so on...
What I was getting at here was to contrast the debate over whether to take a required safety stop with whether to penetrate a wreck. So far, I would say that people treat the "required" safety stop with a great deal less respect than the injunction to avoid overhead environments and wreck penetration.
Urban legend has it that on another recreational (as in no penetration, single tank) wreck dive in this area there was a lost buddy problem as part of a larger group. The most experienced diver took charge and instituted a search of the wreck's exterior and vicinity, then proceeded to lay line into the wreck with his finger spool, where he found the lost and disoriented diver in a siltout.
It is not known whether the rescued diver expressed his gratitude by buying this man beer for life or whether he went top drawer and opted to buy Single Malt Scotch for life. So it is possible to save someone's life by venturing into places where they shouldn't have gone.
I was wondering whether anyone would opt for a search of the holds. So far, nobody has thought it would be a good idea