A controversial concept, but maybe a good one.

[aainslie]

Self congratulatory leadership... my least favorite sort.

Caveat emptor on this guy.

[Superlyte27]

Lol. You're awesome. I'm out. Enjoy the thread.

[TracyN]

This can't possibly be the real Superlyte! Aliens must have abducted him and switched him out with a kinder, more gentle model. No yelling or cursing! Lol! Love ya Pete!

[Nitrogenius]

i'm sure agencies and instructors will be all for this idea. i expect it to be implemented any day now

[Nitrogenius]

I actually like the idea.

Even if one would like the idea, it seems hard to envision any way this should work in reality..
Who would even keep that list? the instructor having a long list of fatalities? certainly not..
The agency with instructors having a long list of fatalities?
Aren't they interested in having the instructors paying their fees for active teaching status? and how would making such list available affect on such instructors willingness to pay dues to such agency?
The agency that such instructor crosses over?
Does he start at such new agency with a clean slate?


That would only work if ALL agencies would act that way and stay true to such system.. anybody seeing that happen??




This is a good point about skills and impact and significance of such system:

I look at GUE and I would guess they train as many or more cave divers per year than say the CDS. Do you think their incident rate is the same?

I state that likely nobody disagrees with the fact that GUE has extremely high standards and therefore the skills and output of GUE certified divers is very high..
Also likely nobody would disagree that the GUE protocols rather err on the conservative side of commonly accepted practices of safe cave diving, right?
Yet they do have fatalities and such fatalities mostly turn out to be the result of human error despite such safe protocols..


What would be the significance of such a fatality on anybodies "track list" ??


In short certainly such system would first not be practical in any way, secondly have no significance towards the quality nor the safety standard of the trainer in question !

[PfcAJ]

Also likely nobody would disagree that the GUE protocols rather err on the conservative side of commonly accepted practices of safe cave diving, right?

I don’t know if I’d call it more conservative or just more thorough, better thought out, and the teachings being more consistent compared to what I’m seeing from other agencies. In my mind what gue teaches isn’t so much “conservatively as it’s just good ideas.

I’m aware of only 1 GUE Cave fatality, and that was from an improper gas switch.

[cerich]

I don’t know if I’d call it more conservative or just more thorough, better thought out, and the teachings being more consistent compared to what I’m seeing from other agencies. In my mind what gue teaches isn’t so much “conservatively as it’s just good ideas.

I’m aware of only 1 GUE Cave fatality, and that was from an improper gas switch.

since when did GUE Cave 1 even include gas switches?

[cerich]

Why is dying while cave diving viewed so negatively?.

Nobody gives a crap that you die in a cave. They ONLY care that you dying in a cave may cause the cave to get closed. It isn't about dive safety, the family/friends, the recovery team (in fact look at the popularity of ICURR workshops, it's what the cool kids do, they can't wait to prove their chops) or any of that.

It's about them.

[PfcAJ]

since when did GUE Cave 1 even include gas switches?

It doesn’t.

1 GUE Cave fatality. Not a GUE Cave 1 fatality.

[cerich]

It doesn’t.

1 GUE Cave fatality. Not a GUE Cave 1 fatality.

thanks, that 1 danced around