Forum for private cave discussion

[Kelly Jessop]

Something that has been discussed,is we are discussing things that for the lay public could be considered a violation of rules,and could upset landowners who view this forum,and defy their trust. Perhaps we need a medium where we can discuss things where we know the only audience will be certified cave/cavern divers. The CDF has many private forums,and perhaps one can be started for this purpose.

[phillip1]

I agree that to landowners and the general public some of the posts could make cave divers look like a bunch of dangerous daredevils and make access etc.. more difficult, so I agree on a private forum for "sensitive" topics.
And also by proven certified cave divers too, as some of the topics are not to be interpreted by novice or untrained divers and could lead to trouble.

[aainslie]

In essence, you're saying that we have been lying to land owners, and you would like us to continue to do so?

As YOU point out, they read this board. You've jsut started a poll that should REALLY piss them off. "Hey guys, we're going to start hiding our thoughts from you".

In general, openness is the better policy IMHO. We all know that divers don't adhere to the rules. Furthermore, we know that deaths are way down, especially given the massive increase in diving. This should be GOOD news. We can improve safety even MORE by NOT being a bunch of ostriches with our heads in the sand, NOT hiding the actuality from people, and having an OPEN discussion about how to improve safety, by setting up rules with high compliance.

[mag3]

Something that has been discussed,is we are discussing things that for the lay public could be considered a violation of rules,and could upset landowners who view this forum,and defy their trust. Perhaps we need a medium where we can discuss things where we know the only audience will be certified cave/cavern divers. The CDF has many private forums,and perhaps one can be started for this purpose.

I can understand restricting the "general" public, but I would not want to restrict to "certified cavern/cave divers only" either. FTR, my cavern program is in progress, and I expect completion before year's end. I can honestly say I've benefited much from viewing the discussion... It has caused me to at least "think," not necessarily "act." Whatever I end up "doing/acting" will be a solution upon which both I and my cave instructor agree beforehand. That said, I'm pretty happy with the existing rules as is. They make intuitive sense to me, presently still being somewhat on the "outside." My personal tendency is to follow all the existing rules 100%, as is my instructor's. That means full/complete continuous guidelines to OW, strict rule of 3rds (maybe slightly more conservatism in low/no flows), etc. etc. But my instructor and I will work that out.

Still, I have enjoyed viewing these discussions. They made me think, and at EOD, they validated my belief in the existing rules. And I'd not want those in my present position (or those in the same position who would follow me) to lose that, if the discussion is hidden from those not yet certified, or worse, not yet "full cave" certified. I have full faith in those rules. But, in order to have "faith" in something, you have to be able to question it.



Just a cavern student's .02 :-)

[Kelly Jessop]

In essence, you're saying that we have been lying to land owners, and you would like us to continue to do so?

No,I am saying a place where we can discuss things and you know who the audience is.


As YOU point out, they read this board. You've jsut started a poll that should REALLY piss them off. "Hey guys, we're going to start hiding our thoughts from you".

Have these forums ever been declared as means the public can view our thoughts,or just a forum where viewing by anybody is possible. There are several private forums that require a registration,are you concerned that the Tennessee forum is not allowing you to look at their discussions,are they hiding something from you? How about the NSS-CDS forum for nonmembers etc.


In general, openness is the better policy IMHO. We all know that divers don't adhere to the rules. Furthermore, we know that deaths are way down, especially given the massive increase in diving. This should be GOOD news. We can improve safety even MORE by NOT being a bunch of ostriches with our heads in the sand, NOT hiding the actuality from people, and having an OPEN discussion about how to improve safety, by setting up rules with high compliance.

I agree about openness,but there are sometimes when a private discussion is more appropriate. If someone declares that exceeding thirds in a high flow system is okay,then I think a private discussion of something being beta tested is better. When a dive manufacturer is about the release a new product,do they test it among a small group,and discuss it privately before they send it out to the general public.

Bottom line is that some discussions in the past have had a negative impact,and there have been a couple instances where I have had to do damage control with owners/property manager. If these benign discussions were held privately,then no issue.

[Kelly Jessop]

I can understand restricting the "general" public, but I would not want to restrict to "certified cavern/cave divers only" either. FTR, my cavern program is in progress, and I expect completion before year's end. I can honestly say I've benefited much from viewing the discussion... It has caused me to at least "think," not necessarily "act." Whatever I end up "doing/acting" will be a solution upon which both I and my cave instructor agree beforehand. That said, I'm pretty happy with the existing rules as is. They make intuitive sense to me, presently still being somewhat on the "outside."

Good point. I have some people say that discussions of alternative cave diving rules should be only for full cave,as to not influence the cavern/intro diver in the learning phase. I don't have an opinion,but offered two choices for those have brought this subject up. Good luck or your learning.

[aainslie]

Kelly, read your opening statement. You are advocating setting up a place where landowners cannot see our discussions.

You can interpret that any way you want. I know how I would interpret it if I were a landowner.

How naive do you think people are?

[Kelly Jessop]

Kelly, read your opening statement. ?


Opening statement said the lay public, and land owners as a cause and effect.

I don't think any members on this forum are naive. I made this poll to get the opinion of all the members who provide knowledgeable insight.

I would figure you would like this concept since I understand that some of your "ideas" have inflammed some of the people at the property you happen to be speaking about in a few weeks. Good luck with this ;-)

[aainslie]

I didn't say opening sentence, I said opening statement. The second sentence clearly shows intent to hide the discussion from the people mentioned in the first sentence. Sheesh.

And it is naive to think that landowners will be cool with this.

Furthermore I view the discussions that i ahve started as being in the interest of MORE, not LESS safety. Hence, I'm not even sure why you think it's a good idea to hide the public appearance that we take our sport seriously enough that we discuss safety issues openly and publicly.

let me point out another thing. How are you going to check peoples' credentials? And how many people, as a result, will never find the forum? Especially new divers in the future?

Sounds like a "good old boy's" club to me.

[Kelly Jessop]

Sounds like a "good old boy's" club to me.

Sorry private forums for Tennessee Cave Diving,Sump Divers,North Texas Cave Divers,Roppel project etc etc....

You have deemed a good ole boy club,and it is in bad taste to have a private discussion.

I have been moderating the Georgia Cave diving forum because I have a lot of experience and exploration time in these caves,as well as mentor people who want to dive these caves,but I don't want to be SGGOLBC (South Georgia goog ole boys club).

[Jim Wyatt]

Something that has been discussed,is we are discussing things that for the lay public could be considered a violation of rules,and could upset landowners who view this forum,and defy their trust. Perhaps we need a medium where we can discuss things where we know the only audience will be certified cave/cavern divers. The CDF has many private forums,and perhaps one can be started for this purpose.

You got my vote. Good idea!!

[aainslie]

I hope you checked with Ken to make sure this is a scientific poll!

[Ken Hill]

Kelly,
In an earlier post on another thread I suggested that the moderators manage a closed forum where the entrant states their name, training level, agency, number of dives and Instructor. This will settle the question of “who” is posting theories and “who” is posting from learned and acquired experience. If someone runs off at the mouth the moderators can step in and perhaps their old instructor can apply some old fashion mentoring. In a perfect world cavern divers could only pose questions and full cave divers could pose or answer.

Years ago (and there are others who have been around longer than I have) discussions such as these took place and the peer review was instantaneous and you knew who was speaking. I recall one CDS workshop when Tom Morris, Woody Jasper and Lamar Hires sat on the edge of the stage and talked to the audience, no egos, words of wisdom and pure cave diving chat for a couple of hours. That was learning at its best.

Now Andrew feels I have an axe to grind with him. I don’t. He may have the time to sit by a keyboard and he may understand some things about diving but he does not seem to understand what it took to get the sites we have. We negotiated, purchased, opened and expanded the rights to dive in Florida. It took years of meetings with owners, state and local officials, biologists and law enforcement. It took committees comprised of reps from the CDS, NACD, IANTD, TDI and GUE, the major training agencies all with the same policies and rules for their trainees. These rules and policies were the cornerstone of each and every negotiation.

For the most part recreational cave diving has been safe and for the most part accidents other than health maladies are traced directly to violation of one of the basic rules or diving practices beyond any training level or equipment design. This results in a recovery, often hazardous to the IUCRR diver who is charged not only with the recovery but with observing and recording evidence and preparing a written report for law enforcement use. The IUCRR “speaks for the dead” through the eyes and observations of its recovery divers. The report is prepared solely for law enforcement and is a legal document that may be used in either criminal or civil inquiry. If any glaring departure from the rules of accident analysis is observed the pertinent information is passed to the training directors of the CDS and the NACD with the hopes it will make cave diving safer.

I say go for it. /Ken

[Arctic Mike]

I don't believe a private forum is necessary but I do like Ken's suggestion of stating your certifications, experience, etc. I looked at the my User CP and don't see an area specifically for this. Perhaps making an area for this information mandatory for Users would be a simple way to go?

[Cali Knucklehead]

Something that has been discussed,is we are discussing things that for the lay public could be considered a violation of rules,and could upset landowners who view this forum,and defy their trust. Perhaps we need a medium where we can discuss things where we know the only audience will be certified cave/cavern divers. The CDF has many private forums,and perhaps one can be started for this purpose.

I like the idea Kelly. We do the same thing on our local board for trimix discussions. I don't want to be responsible for someone seeing a deco profile online and "trying" it out on their own. At the same time, I don't want a cavern diver (no offense cavern divers - we were all there at one time in our cave diving lives) to read that 33% of full caver divers don't run primaries or jumps and then think that running lines is a waste. These discussions belong in a place where all the parties completely understand the risks of their actions.

Bruce

[wendellnope]

Colleagues,

I have spent a number of hours contemplating how to articulate some meaningful input on this issue. Now I'm ready. I suggest that it is extraordinarily risky to use the internet, a CDF Public Forum, or even a CDF Private Forum as the vehicle for this controversial issue. An issue such as this is best reviewed/debated/resolved (1)by those truly competent to offer input on the question, (2)in a non-internet forum environment where their opinions are exchanged/reviewed ONLY by peers and NOT novices, NOT landowners, and NOT lurking Plaintiff's attorneys. First, it is very likely that novices will read the commentaries (regarding personal diving practices) from well-known individuals ... individuals who are in a (real OR imagined) "Position of Trust" in the in the Cave Diving subculture and then the novice may desire to prematurely internalize any perceived deviations from the entry-level Full Cave Diver diving standards. Second, it is very likely that landowners may perceive the diversity in opinions among the "post-ers" negatively and over-react in order to protect their own interests. This over-reaction could include closing caves, restricting access, or even super-stringent land-owner-imposed diving standards. Also, it is very likely that Plaintiff's attorneys who are presently preparing litigation against Cave Divers, Instructors, or Agencies are being educated right now beyond their wildest dreams ... not to mention future cases in which the attorneys may issue a subpoena duces tecum to Yahoo for a text copy of all the Public & Private Forums relating to this issue. The prudent "well-known" Cave Diver, Instructor, etc. should not disclose nor discuss his/her non-standard "personal diving practices" over the internet.

To clarify, I am not saying that a review or debate on this issue is a bad thing. I am only saying it is BAD and RISKY and UNWISE to do so over the internet.

Since most of y'all don't even know me, I'll offer some validation to my declarations. I have been a law enforcement officer all my adult life, a full-time Police Academy Instructor* for the last 19 years, a State Police Dive Team* trainer for the last 7 years, recovered 5 drowning victims to-date, and am an IUCRR Diver*. My secondary employment is legal consulting in criminal/civil litigations. If you do not trust what I've said, ask Mr. Craig Jenni ... whom I suspect some of y'all use as a legal advisor.

Wendell Nope
www.wendellnope.com/scuba3.htm web

*I do not represent my personal opinion(s) as being an official position(s) of this entity.

[Kelly Jessop]

Wendell I appreciate your comments,and they are very valid. Before the internet there was picnic table pontificating where these ideas would be expressed in a small forum. Unfortunately the internet has opened the Pandora's box for easy communication,the lid will never be closed. To encourage certain things not be posted out of sensitivies will involve a universal acceptance, which will be nearly impossible,plus if people don't like the rules of this forum,then there are somany others to chose from. I am sure that Craig Jenni could look through years of discussions here and other forums,and groan loudly. Hence,open commincation on a forum can't be stopped,but at least have an avenue where we know we have cave divers talking with cave divers,and only cave diver lurking in the background.

[Ben M]

I'm against the idea of the private forum, but if it encourages more discussion I would accept it.

I've browsed the current forum rules and see nothing against having these types of discussions. If I've missed it please point it out. I've seen several caution, urge against it, or even state it is against the rules in an effort to quiet others. Since the posts generally remain, I have to assume there is no rule. Several of these individuals cautioning against have great the experience and credentials to support their claims and some others do not. There are good reasons not to have those discussions, but there are also good reasons to have them.

As has been stated, the cave diving community has grown. The problem with the picnic table chats and such is these methods do not reach the community at large anymore (if ever). I will not be reached in these methods. I avoid crowed dive sites. Passing another dive team in the water is rare for me, because of where and when I generally choose to dive. I am sure I am not alone in this. While I am not generally vocal, the internet gives me a place to read and participate. Even when not participating the posts cause me to at least think about these topics.

I love Andrew's posts. Even when I completely disagree, it makes me think about the way I dive. Sometimes, I make adjustments and other times I don't. None of the expert groups has that effect on me. As a cave diver or even an open water diver, we know we are entering a hostile environment. This risk of not returning is always there. The only way to mitigate that one completely is not go in the first place. It is human nature to question things. There are many experts here that choose not to post in a meaningful way. The reasons for not posting are many (belief that it shouldn't be on the internet, commercial conflict of interest, previous flame wars, cave politics, etc.) , but the simple fact is their experience doesn't reach the community at large. Cave training lasts but a few days. Learning is continuous and it needs a number of avenues to reach the population.

Ben Martinez

Cave certified since 2000
Cave class- NSS-CDS - Pat Watson
Cave 1 Class - GUE - Tamara Kendell

[phillip1]

I didn't say opening sentence, I said opening statement. The second sentence clearly shows intent to hide the discussion from the people mentioned in the first sentence. Sheesh.

And it is naive to think that landowners will be cool with this.

Furthermore I view the discussions that i ahve started as being in the interest of MORE, not LESS safety. Hence, I'm not even sure why you think it's a good idea to hide the public appearance that we take our sport seriously enough that we discuss safety issues openly and publicly.

let me point out another thing. How are you going to check peoples' credentials? And how many people, as a result, will never find the forum? Especially new divers in the future?

Sounds like a "good old boy's" club to me.

The problem is when the general public discovers through a poll scientific or not, that over 50% of divers do not follow a basic cave diving safety principle.
I think that all involved in that discussion so far are certified cave divers (I may be wrong) and that right or wrong they feel that they're experience allows them to modify/change such rules in they're diving practices.
The general public should not read such stuff as they will draw mostly negative conclusions from such discussions, if I were not into cave diving and read all those posts, I would conclude that most cave divers knowingly disregard basic established safety standards and that they are a bunch of fearless daredevils.
For sensitive subjects like that I definitely think it should be private.
In my experience (in the DR) when people see you go in a cave they think you are insane and have a less than 50% chance of getting out. Anytime you speak about cave diving they see it as a daredevil, death defying sport, now in addition to an opinion like that, if those same people were to read posts between cave divers about how they don't follow this rule or that rule is "stupid" etc.. it will only reinforce that view.
I think it is super important to discuss safety standards and what could be done to improve those standards, that discussion should never stop as it is the basis for improving safety, but I think it is an "insiders" subject and should not be viewed by anyone else than certified cave divers.
I say certified because if a cavern certified diver were to read such stuff he or she might think "hey those experienced guys are doing it that way, maybe I should..." and they could be negatively influenced, for nothing more than just reading about it.
Obviously if a rule is modified or improved and made to be safer, or if a new safety guideline is found to be necessary, make those new rules public asap, but it is the actual "building" so to speak, of the rules that should be kept private.
Just my opinion as sometimes here (DR) we are walking on eggshells when it comes to getting permission to dive.

[mpoucher]

I don't think you need a private forum. First thing that will happen is things will start getting moved into it when deemed "controversial" , so you will lose a lot of discussion on the general board. Second, I agree with the previous statement that landowners will view it as a negative and begin to wonder what we are really up to.

Last, we have been predicting escalating accidents, destruction of caves, and the demise of the sport as we know it since the mid 90's when cave diving began being discussed on the internet. None of it has happened yet.

Cave diving is safer now than it has ever been and most of the discussions I see here lean towards safety and conservatism. Most cave divers are safe and conservative by nature - that's what draws them to it, but you will always have those that aren't, as with any sport. That's why we have vehicle accidents, hunting accidents, boating accidents, skiing accidents, etc. etc that far surpass anything in cave diving.

[phillip1]

That's why we have vehicle accidents, hunting accidents, boating accidents, skiing accidents, etc. etc that far surpass anything in cave diving.

I know I have asked this before and it is totally off subject but how many (very roughly) cave divers are there in FL.
I don't have a concept at all, is it thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds.
How many cave dives are done each year? I am asking this to kind of get a sense of how many accidents per participants there are more or less and get an idea of how cave diving compares to other sports.
If this needs to be moved to another forum I understand.

[FW]

....Last, we have been predicting escalating accidents, destruction of caves, and the demise of the sport as we know it since the mid 90's when cave diving began being discussed on the internet. None of it has happened yet....
I am not so sure that it hasn't happened. The Lips, Henkel, Half-hitch, and Peanut "restrictions" are hardly restrictions anymore. There used to be big red-brown limestone flakes in the Cornflakes area. The walls (all of them) in Devil's Eye used to be black, but now, they are mostly white for the first couple thousand feet, and along the major scooter routes.

[FW]

I know I have asked this before and it is totally off subject but how many (very roughly) cave divers are there in FL.
I don't have a concept at all, is it thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds.
How many cave dives are done each year? I am asking this to kind of get a sense of how many accidents per participants there are more or less and get an idea of how cave diving compares to other sports.
If this needs to be moved to another forum I understand.
That is a difficult question to answer. There are probably about 1,000 more-or-less *active* cave divers. Some dive a few times a week, others a few times a year. The parking lots at Ginnie, and Peacock stay pretty full most weekends, but not so much during the week. It would be good information, though.

[Kelly Jessop]

I am not so sure that it hasn't happened. The Lips, Henkel, Half-hitch, and Peanut "restrictions" are hardly restrictions anymore. There used to be big red-brown limestone flakes in the Cornflakes area. The walls (all of them) in Devil's Eye used to be black, but now, they are mostly white for the first couple thousand feet, and along the major scooter routes.


Lips entering into the Peanut tunnel was not discernable,that is the reason for the mistake,Peanut restriction was a real restriction.

[Kelly Jessop]

. Second, I agree with the previous statement that landowners will view it as a negative and begin to wonder what we are really up to.

.


Mike,you and I have both done things to promote landowner relations,and still have concern for this. If you look at The Deco Stop and some other technical dive forums,you must be a registered user to view the forum,and special request for subforums,but I don't think anybody sees this as hiding anything,but just a standard part of the operation. The CDF allows an unregistered user to view the forums,so I am no longer sharing with people who know the rudiments of diving,let alone cave diving. I am just proposing a forum,where we know that the viewers and participants are only cavern/cave divers,nothing that isn't done in other places.

[Diverlee]

I am just curious. Are there really that many land owners, with caves on their property, that spend all their free time reading our forums? Or even understand cave diving? Just curious, don't want to get in any debate.

[Jim Wyatt]

Are there really that many land owners, with caves on their property, that spend all their free time reading our forums?

Not all their free time, no. But I know for a fact that they look and also have people reporting to them regarding the contents of these forums.

My phone has rung more than once from "Landowners" asking me about stuff they read here or on other forums. I attend meetings where "Landowners" are present and ask about what is going on in regards to various postings on this & other forums.

You may be surprised at who all actually reads this stuff & it does not require all of their free time.

[phillip1]

Just another reason to make some topics private, a forum post could cause a big problem if misinterpreted.

[aainslie]

Kelly,

Why not simply do what TDS does, and require people to register before reading?

[FW]

Kelly,

Why not simply do what TDS does, and require people to register before reading?

Some of the forums are already like that. The Accident Analysis forum is registered only, as are the Gear Exchange and Fill Station. All the special forums at the bottom require special admission. The problem is, people are dragging the discussions out to the main forum.

[FW]

Lips entering into the Peanut tunnel was not discernable,that is the reason for the mistake,Peanut restriction was a real restriction.
Mistake?

I was referring to the Lips at Devil's Eye. I guess I shouldn't have grouped restrictions from 3 different systems into the same sentence :-)

[skip]

Hiding our words from the public eye does not set well with me. I don't want to be part of any group that does that. I am sure I am a part of some groups or insititutions that has such hiding policies (tennessee subforum for one), but I don't like it. I think it's a mistake and will have negative consequences in the long run. Imagine the poor intro to cave diver who earns full cave and discovers that all along there's been a secret society communing on the internet, controlling things behind the scenes, an elite cadre of only those who meet the criteria. If that happened to me I would have resigned from every cave organization, told all the training agencies to take a hike and gone out on my own to discover cave diving with nary a look at a mentor or so-called elitist superior sob so ego-obsessed that he/she thinks that what they had to discuss was to harsh for tender ears, to dangerous for the uninitiated, to blasphemous for the religious.

Go on, create your own little secret world, just leave me out of it. I'll say what I want to say openly to all who have the time and inclination to read it and I'll stand by it too. And if someone is foolish enough to die from my words, that is not my fault. I take responsibility for my actions and resent it when someone else, in the name of so-called concern, takes that responsibility away from me, claiming to protect me from myself. no thanks.

-skip

[BackstageDiver]

I think a main part of this discussion that might be overlooked is the contrast of not revealing something to the public and hiding something from the public. I think this idea of a private, entry-controlled forum belongs to the latter.

Some people are comparing a private forum online to a discussion at a park bench at a dive site. That's not really the best analogy in my opinion. People won't be suspicious at divers talking to each other face to face because there is no criteria for what they talk about. Could be the rules they break diving, the football game the day before, what they had for lunch, gear configurations, their new rifle, or how much their spouse pisses them off. However, if we create a private forum or subforum for controversial issues, people will know we are talking about controversial issues. A remedy to that would to make all discussions private to go back to the idea of they could be talking about anything, but just between a few people. I don't like that either; that sounds like becoming a Good Old Boys Club where a select few decide who is worthy of being let in on their discussions.

I, being a new overhead diver, have learned a lot from this forum, especially the rules discussions and the contemplations about the circumstances of our most recent loss. A lot of discussions on here have a lot of thought put into them and they create intelligent discourse, which is perhaps the basest foundation of human intelligence and progress. Almost all discussions I've read put an emphasis on moving toward safer practices, whatever the means may be.

If you want to have controversial discussions, do it through personally private means: in person, on the phone, private emails or PMs. Don't do it on a public website, even behind a barricade, because certain people will see at least some level of it and probably not like it very much.

[Kelly Jessop]

Kelly,

Why not simply do what TDS does, and require people to register before reading?

Good point,and I wondered why the owners/moderators have the forum open to all versus registered users but with private forums,that is why I posed the poll like I did.

[Kelly Jessop]

Mistake?

I was referring to the Lips at Devil's Eye. I guess I shouldn't have grouped restrictions from 3 different systems into the same sentence :-)

The line heading to the Peanut tunnel used to stop around the sign. You had to run a reel into the Peanut tunnel to find the permenant line. Often,people would miss the lips just before the Peanut tunnel and continue straight ahead into what is called the mistake. At one time the lips was not easily discernable,but now with the wear and tear,it is very obvious.

[Kelly Jessop]

. I am sure I am a part of some groups or insititutions that has such hiding policies (tennessee subforum for one), but I don't like it.


I don't think the moderators set things up for secretiveness,but a way of bringing together like interested people. I appreciate your opinions Skip,and I would hate to see you not post your thoughts. Keep filming those great videos you showed.

[Diverlee]

Not all their free time, no. But I know for a fact that they look and also have people reporting to them regarding the contents of these forums.

My phone has rung more than once from "Landowners" asking me about stuff they read here or on other forums. I attend meetings where "Landowners" are present and ask about what is going on in regards to various postings on this & other forums.

You may be surprised at who all actually reads this stuff & it does not require all of their free time.

Thanks Jim.

[BobK]

Wendell I appreciate your comments,and they are very valid. Before the internet there was picnic table pontificating where these ideas would be expressed in a small forum. Unfortunately the internet has opened the Pandora's box for easy communication,the lid will never be closed. To encourage certain things not be posted out of sensitivies will involve a universal acceptance, which will be nearly impossible,plus if people don't like the rules of this forum,then there are somany others to chose from. I am sure that Craig Jenni could look through years of discussions here and other forums,and groan loudly. Hence,open commincation on a forum can't be stopped,but at least have an avenue where we know we have cave divers talking with cave divers,and only cave diver lurking in the background.

Pretty optimistic to think that any real controversial topic isn't going to leak out. So then you'll have a bunch of posts with people speaking their mind, secure in the thought that no none cave divers are reading them, that make their way to the general public.

The country can't even keep secrets that endanger lives, even though those entrusted with those secrets reveal them under pain of criminal prosecution, do you really think the contents of this forum are really going to stay private ?

I think we are much better off speaking with the knowledge that the public at large can read what we write.

[Cleric]

.... At the same time, I don't want a cavern diver (no offense cavern divers - we were all there at one time in our cave diving lives) to read that 33% of full caver divers don't run primaries or jumps and then think that running lines is a waste. These discussions belong in a place where all the parties completely understand the risks of their actions.

Bruce

I also agree with this. Although I have learned quite a bit about stuff on the public forums, I can also see where having some private discussions, consider it 'pre-release', would benefit the whole community.

As for as GOBS (Good 'ole Boy System), it's already here. I don't take offense to it, I have not been here that long. I have not already 'been there, done that..' There are several of you out there that I respect enormously (even if it is just from your percieved knowledge here @ CDF). I would hate to see information being spoon fed to those who truly want to improve and increase thier own safety.


I'm against the idea of the private forum, but if it encourages more discussion I would accept it.

I've seen several caution, urge against it, or even state it is against the rules in an effort to quiet others. There are good reasons not to have those discussions, but there are also good reasons to have them.

I love Andrew's posts. Even when I completely disagree, it makes me think about the way I dive. Sometimes, I make adjustments and other times I don't.

Cave training lasts but a few days. Learning is continuous and it needs a number of avenues to reach the population.


All true statements.



If you want to have controversial discussions, do it through personally private means: in person, on the phone, private emails or PMs. Don't do it on a public website, even behind a barricade, because certain people will see at least some level of it and probably not like it very much.

How do you hold 'discussions' through emails/pm's? Information, thoughts, and ideas flow through forums, but become disconnected and lost through emails/pm's when you are involving several participants.

Here is a question / example.

Anthony T posted a 'dive report' from Ginnie / Devil's. While he wasn't exactly "Slammed" for doing so, he was admonished in the second reply to his report for describing certian sections in the front end of the system (cornflakes, expressway, etc..). With the thought that it would increase traffic to those areas and potentially cause more damage? Being that area is one of only a few passages further into the cave, isn't it likely that there will be traffic there anyway, even if just by sheer statistics?

I understand that every effort is made to keep people who don't belong in the systems (as in NON-CAVE-certified divers) from being there. Wouldn't it be common sense that since this particular area is accessible only after a jump or two (the first one around a formation and pretty well hidden from view..), it should be fair game to talk about?

Much like Anthony, I am trying to mark on my map where I have been in Devil's (in all systems, actually). Knowing the proper names for some of the passages has been extremely helpful. We hear about many of the major landmarks, but it is difficult to get anyone to talk about 'exactly' how to get there. It would be nice to have a forum that we could be free to discuss those.

Roger

[Slüdge]

I think we are much better off speaking with the knowledge that the public at large can read what we write.

Words of wisdom. Although the "private" forum idea has merit, I think what Bob said is the answer.

Also, what it says on our home page: Be careful, responsible, and mature, both in your posts and how you use anything you read here.

[Ken Hill]

I think we are much better off speaking with the knowledge that the public at large can read what we write.

Maybe so! You make a good point so does Mike Poucher and Skip. What do you think about the posting requirement in a special section of the forum where the person posting registers with his/her real name, training credentials, instructor/agency, Abe Davis/Wakulla, experience and so on?

There would be no secrets from the public, only responses from qualified cave divers at whatever level of training completion. Then you as well as the public could make a better choice as to who should be given any credence. Every cave diver has worked long and hard to achieve that title, why not let it be the benchmark for speaking about current issues.

As an aside, there is a site that a few years ago (http://cyberseals.org/SEAL%20Imposters.html ) published the names of US Navy SEAL Team imposters. The site manager would find out about so-called cyber seals posting on the web and relaying BS about their training and experience. They had a list of hundreds of these guys. I think there's a good chance there are cyber cave divers too and why should any of their opinions be weighted as much as yours?

/Ken

[Arctic Mike]

Why does it have to be in a special section of the forum? I still think making this required information in every UCP would accomplish the same thing.

[skip]

If you set up a private forum for those who meet some criteria, what's to stop others from just going ahead and posting whatever they want in the public forum/area? It seems then that the only way to have a private forum is some pretty serious censoring of the public forum (you can't say that here, you can only say that in one of the private cave divers only forums). So the proposal of a private forum (for the protection of the weenies and to keep secrets from landowners) necessitates major censoring of the cdf's so called public forums.

I also think when/if such censoring occurs, you will see a new cave diver's forum set up; one without the censors and whole new set of moderators. People will create the means and migrate to where speech is free.

-skip

[Ken Hill]

If you set up a private forum for those who meet some criteria, what's to stop others from just going ahead and posting whatever they want in the public forum/area?
-skip


I agree that you cannot control posts, but the way it is now there is no way of telling if a person has had any training or not or is even a diver. If someone with credentials posts it can be read and evaluated by the community. If a poster, lets call him say "#1cavegod," posts without any references no one should listen nor should any comment be taken seriously.

A participant can keep their handle but other participants can see who that party is. /Ken

[BobK]

Maybe so! You make a good point so does Mike Poucher and Skip. What do you think about the posting requirement in a special section of the forum where the person posting registers with his/her real name, training credentials, instructor/agency, Abe Davis/Wakulla, experience and so on?

There would be no secrets from the public, only responses from qualified cave divers at whatever level of training completion. Then you as well as the public could make a better choice as to who should be given any credence. Every cave diver has worked long and hard to achieve that title, why not let it be the benchmark for speaking about current issues.

As an aside, there is a site that a few years ago (http://cyberseals.org/SEAL%20Imposters.html ) published the names of US Navy SEAL Team imposters. The site manager would find out about so-called cyber seals posting on the web and relaying BS about their training and experience. They had a list of hundreds of these guys. I think there's a good chance there are cyber cave divers too and why should any of their opinions be weighted as much as yours?

/Ken

I think it's a good idea. I have always been a proponent of more information available, not less, this supports that.

[Jay]

I can see the merits of a 'private' forum. Scubaboard has several for instuctors, captains, etc.
Some things should not be discussed publicly as they are open to misinterpretation.

For instance, it seems shocking to me that we would actually have a public poll on line use. I don't think too many people are naive enough to be really surprised at the results, but a few years ago that would never become public knowledge.
And yes, in the 'public' eye it could be a bad thing. We lay our foundation of public trust on the basis of our training programs and then we publicly admit the majority surveyed don't follow them?
In a 'private' forum people may be more forthright in their answers and discussion then in a public one.

[skip]

I judge an idea by the merit of the idea, not the "qualifications" of the poster.

Why would anyone tell the truth? Or are you suggesting that there be a CDF committee charged with determining the truth of each resume? That we are to become a group that so fears the errant posing poster that we must verify "credentials" of all who post? And if I post that I am not a cave diver, but a landowner, or not a landowner, but florida parks official....?

The administration of such a plan, the sheer bureaucratic weight of it bodes ill.

1984. Big Brother is Watching. So all the Little Brothers Hide behind credentialing.

I like CDF the way it is. Open. We are a diverse group with diverse opinions and biases that provide the best ideas of any format. A closed group of elites is doomed to self-stroking, not interesting dialogue, not creative solutions, and most definitely not evolving practices. Variability in ideas is as important to innovation as Variability in genetic material is to evolution. Cut yourselves off from the larger population and extinction will surely follow.

Openness and Equal Access to anyone and everyone without an ID check is the only legitimate way to behave. Private forums for those who want them and open to any who ask to join them irrespective of their certification level, experience, merit of thought, is the only kind of CDF I can support.

I've learned more about cave diving from those not trained in cave diving than I have from those trained. The untrained is a great source of inspiration for the trained, ask any instructor. That's the very pool you wish to exclude from participation.

-skip

[BackstageDiver]

I like CDF the way it is. Open. We are a diverse group with diverse opinions and biases that provide the best ideas of any format.... Variability in ideas is as important to innovation as Variability in genetic material is to evolution.

Skip, I agree with just about everything you just said. I often have trouble articulating the thoughts in my head, but you pretty much nailed it with your whole post.

I do have a slight bone to pick though...

Cut yourselves off from the larger population and extinction will surely follow.

Separation from a population is actually one of the primary factors in speciation, assuming the separate population reproduces, since any mutations propagate faster through smaller populations. So, to continue with your analogy, we'd get a new species of cave diver that grows less compatible with the main population with each generation, which I think is just as bad.
/end bio-nerd rand

[skip]

true, but you are assuming that the smaller group has sufficient genetic variation to propagate successfully. in this case it would be "memetic" variation (memes = parcels of memories like genes = parcels of biologies). i am predicting that the splinter group would be too small for adaptation and thus become extinct. your prediciton is scarier. almost halloween-like. :cartman99

-skip

[BackstageDiver]

I did say in my post that I assumed (perhaps naively, or perhaps not) the smaller group could reproduce successfully, but you do make a good point. I had never heard of the term "memetics" before. After looking into it a little, it's a perfect fit for the analogy. You are a bright man.

[deepdiverbob]

Something that has been discussed,is we are discussing things that for the lay public could be considered a violation of rules,and could upset landowners who view this forum,and defy their trust. Perhaps we need a medium where we can discuss things where we know the only audience will be certified cave/cavern divers. The CDF has many private forums,and perhaps one can be started for this purpose.


Would you grant "read only" access to land owners? I am trying to put myself in their position, and I would really get suspicious if things started going private so I couldn't see it anymore. I think that would go against all the good things you have worked towards in land owner relationships.

I agree with Skip, although I wont use 200 point scrabble words to make my point. I like the openness of this forum. I dont think its up to the mods or board members to police divers, and have them do things they aren't trained, experienced or qualified to be doing.

[Cindy]

I can't imagine any normal land owner knowing about or caring about this forum. The Ginnie/State whatever divers who read this know we are all nuts to start with because they are themselves nutty. LOL So the main people that are causing the worry are cave divers or have cave divers on the staff so what's the big secret. You can't keep them out.
I originally thought this was supposed to be for divers interested and in cave diving. It seems to be getting somewhat convoluted lately.

[deepdiverbob]

I can't imagine any normal land owner knowing about or caring about this forum...

I thought the same thing, until I saw Jim's post:

But I know for a fact that they look and also have people reporting to them regarding the contents of these forums.

My phone has rung more than once from "Landowners" asking me about stuff they read here or on other forums. I attend meetings where "Landowners" are present and ask about what is going on in regards to various postings on this & other forums.

You may be surprised at who all actually reads this stuff & it does not require all of their free time.

[Ken Hill]

I can't imagine any normal land owner .

Hey Cindy,
Land owners are rightly concerned about possible liability and the tendency of plaintiff attorneys to get the courts to shift the assumption of risk on them. While negotiating site openings, several in government told me they Googled "cave diving" to learn about the sport. It is not unusual to have a reporter call after an incident and ask for a comment about the incident or about internet chatter about it. We are a sporting activity that can make a sensational news story. Incidents are always covered and sometimes feedback tells me that they are wire serviced throughout the world.

This is no longer an environment where everybody knew everyone else. There are a lot new people (that in itself is not bad) however some seem to lack the understanding of what it took to get where we are and what it will take to keep access open. I hate to think that the recent events of the museum are a sign of things to comes, but none the less it happened. What was discussion 15 years ago is the same discussion today, but now the internet has made the hypothetical appear to be gospel to some.

/Ken

[Cali Knucklehead]

Another sensitive topic that I'd like to see in a private forum is a discussion on "Exploration vs Conservation." Why is it that some people are so vocal about the front half of a system being damaged due to too much traffic, but turn a blind eye when divers break open a restriction with the butt of an Al80 in the back of the system? When is intentional damage not considered vandalism?

[Jay]

With cave divers you only need two to have 'sufficient genetic variation'. In some cases one is enough. :)


true, but you are assuming that the smaller group has sufficient genetic variation to propagate successfully. in this case it would be "memetic" variation (memes = parcels of memories like genes = parcels of biologies). i am predicting that the splinter group would be too small for adaptation and thus become extinct. your prediciton is scarier. almost halloween-like. :cartman99

-skip

[MORGAN]

With cave divers you only need two to have 'sufficient genetic variation'. In some cases one is enough. :)

Are some cave divers capable of asexual reproduction? :)

Mike

[DarkCoffee]

Only the solo ones.. <sorry, couldn't resist. Back to lurking>

[skip]

I ran a chi-square analysis on the poll data. With four categories there is a statistical difference in the frequencies (x2 = 39.28, p < .05). This means different number of people in each category. But since three categories are in favor of a private forum of some kind and only one category is opposed to a private forum, it seems reasonable to collapse them into two categories: those in favor of a private forum and those opposed (this gives 59 vs 38 ). Now the chi-square says no difference from what you'd expect by chance variation (x2 = 2.27, p > .05).

At this point, although you may think 59 vs 38 represents a difference, we must say it indicates an equal split on the vote.

Things may change as more people vote, but it seems like it's been long enough to get an idea of opinions.

-skip

[aainslie]

Did you check that with Ken? He may have an opinion on how scientific your chisq stat is. Especially after a bit of googling.

(This also is when some moronic repetition of Disraeli's hopelessly dumbass quote also comes up... why the hell anyone would trust a politician's opinion on anything is beyond me...)

Good luck with this audience, Skip!


I ran a chi-square analysis on the poll data. With four categories there is a statistical difference in the frequencies (x2 = 39.28, p < .05). This means different number of people in each category. But since three categories are in favor of a private forum of some kind and only one category is opposed to a private forum, it seems reasonable to collapse them into two categories: those in favor of a private forum and those opposed (this gives 59 vs 38 ). Now the chi-square says no difference from what you'd expect by chance variation (x2 = 2.27, p > .05).

At this point, although you may think 59 vs 38 represents a difference, we must say it indicates an equal split on the vote.

Things may change as more people vote, but it seems like it's been long enough to get an idea of opinions.

-skip

[atedeschi]

Andrew & Skip with your voodoo math stuff. Thats the devils work. :D

[Slüdge]

why the hell anyone would trust a politician's opinion on anything is beyond me

Because it's funny, and it's true.

[aainslie]

Because it's funny, and it's true.

Really? Do you have statistical evidence that it's true?

:)

[Slüdge]

How about this one: "There are five kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, statistics, politicians quoting statistics, and novelists quoting politicians on statistics" - Stephen K. Tagg

[wingman]

How about this one: "There are five kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, statistics, politicians quoting statistics, and novelists quoting politicians on statistics" - Stephen K. Tagg

Damn Russell for a polymath and an mba i sometimes wonder, give credit to twain where credit is due...i prefer:

“People commonly use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post; for support rather than illumination” – Mark Twain

[MORGAN]

Damn Russell for a polymath and an mba i sometimes wonder, give credit to twain where credit is due...i prefer:

“People commonly use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post; for support rather than illumination” – Mark Twain

Yup - that's one of my favorite Twain quotes too.



Three statisticians went deer hunting. They saw a deer on a hillside not far away. The first statistician fired, and hit a foot in front of the deer. The second statistician fired, and hit a foot behind the deer. The third statistician leapt in the air in delight, yelling, "You got him!"



Mike

[Slüdge]

give credit to twain where credit is due

Twain himself attributed the quote to Disraeli (in "Chapters from my Autobiography," North American Review, no. DCXVIII), but I prefer another, simpler quote, which my undergraduate statistics teacher told us the same day he told us Disraeli's quote: Figures don't lie, but liars figure.

Funny, the gist of this hijack is that statisticians can make numbers say whatever they want them to say. But Andrew is all, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

[cmalinowski]

Great. What if there's a mathematician who is a land-owner of one of the sites and they read this? Now they're all pissed that people are calling them names and painting them in a bad light. They'll shut down access for sure.

This whole thread should be moved to a private forum.

:)

Chris

[Slüdge]

This whole thread should be moved to a private forum.

... as we have come full circle. :rollguy

[OFG-1]

..... for a polymath and an mba ........

Damn, it finally makes sense!! I KNOW that Poly is a bird, so all of you are doing birdmath.

(Want a cracker??)

[aainslie]

This thread is getting better by the minute. Damn, I love hijacks!