which diver are you?, part two

"Dan Bracuk" <NOTbracuk@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:f83bd111u80akna05ni73jegppsjdjgjh8@4ax.com...
> "Ross Garrett" <frederickrossgarrett@hotmail.com>

>: But, that
> :doesn't mean any operation or boat can't make it a requirement of *their*
> :operation that divers do so before being allowed to dive from their boats

> Any dive shop/boat can set whatever rules they want.

?

"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> pounded away at his
keyboard resulting in:
:I like the briefing (which puts the RESPONSIBILITY on the divers):
:"If you screw up, you ruin the vacation of the OTHERS on the boat".

I always enjoyed the part where they say, "if we catch you with drugs
we put you ashore at the nearest spot of land".

Dan Bracuk
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Dan Bracuk wrote:
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> pounded away at his
> keyboard resulting in:
> :They rules are not always available BEFORE one boards a liveaboard.
>
> Nekton is very good about this. They send you a copy of the waiver in
> advance of the trip. Admittedly, it is after you have paid your
> "non-refundable" deposit, but nothing is perfect.
>
> Even better is that they didn't enforce the "must dive with snorkel"
> rule.
>


What's a snorkel? :)

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in:
:What's a snorkel? :)

It's something you should bring on a Nekton trip, just in case they
choose to enforce their own rules.

Or, if you are adamant about not having one, take your money
elsewhere.

Life is so easy when you know the rules in advance.

Dan Bracuk
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Dan Bracuk wrote:
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> pounded away at his
> keyboard resulting in:
> :They rules are not always available BEFORE one boards a liveaboard.
>
> Nekton is very good about this. They send you a copy of the waiver in
> advance of the trip. Admittedly, it is after you have paid your
> "non-refundable" deposit, but nothing is perfect.

LOL! In the Dancer requiring cyalume and ONLY cyalume would do case,
what made me all the more p*ssed was that I had signed a WAIVER,
waiving them EVERYTHING, including "negligence" -- I remember that
very clearly ... I have to look this up.

Here it is -- the Dancer Waiver:

I RELEASE SEA DANCER FROM ANY CLAIM OR ANY CAUSE OF ACTION
I, OR MY ESTATE, MAY HAVE FOR PERSONAL INJURY, ILLNESS,
PROPERTY DAMAGE OR CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF SAID PARTIES
OR OTHERWISE. I AGREE TO HOLD SEA DANCER HARMLESS FOR ANY
CLAIMS FOR AND/OR ANY INFURY OR DEATH WHICH MAY OCCUR TO ME
DURING OR AS A RESULT OF ANY DIVING ACTIVITIES.

I told Peter since I hold myself 100% responsible for my diving safety,

I don't have any problem signing the Waiver though I thought it silly
to release them of NEGLIGENCE! However, I found it very objectionable

to have the CYALUME light and other equally frivolous and arbitrary
requirements (supposedly dictated by the same attorneys who wrote the
Waiver!)

BTW, I think it's the general consensus that a waiver, such as the
one above, is not worth the paper it's written on. I am sure
those Wave Dancer victims in the Belize hurricane accidentall signed
the exact or similar waivers.

>
> Even better is that they didn't enforce the "must dive with snorkel"
> rule.

I am shocked! :) I thought that rule only existed in Australia.
They also have the Queensland Codes which make Florida, Carribean,
and Texas rules look like lessez faire without rules.

-- Bob.

captkeywest wrote:
snip

>So if a checkout
> program becomes reality I would expect it to be associated with each
> individuals certifying agencies recommendations....

Now you're really getting scary.... "if a checkout program becomes a
reality".... What is the Master Plan?

Could it be any more arbitrary than to use the recommendations of the
individual's certifying agency? How did they come up with those
guidelines, I wonder? Legal department memo, maybe.

> A yearly checkout dive shouldn't put a burr in anybodies swimsuit!

I'm guessing you _know_ that's not the case, because many people don't
like _unnecessary_ losses of freedom, however small, as each small
incremental loss adds up, if only in annoyance.

And I'm guessing that you would want to require ALL dive operations in
your area to mandate these checkout dives, not allowing an operation to
opt out and gain advantage and increased revenue.

Of course, it wouldn't be long before word got out, even if you didn't
disclose it in ads or websites, prompting divers to go to a different
area, one not so restrictive. The side benefit will be less cattle
boats on the reefs perhaps. At least that would have a more positive
effect than mandatory checkout dives.

> It would not surprise me if Scott left that part out intentionally
> figuring any controversy would likely draw attention to the need for
> proper buoyancy control in the fragile coral reef environment and was
> just exploiting that controversy to try and protect the natural
> resources divers are trying to visit in the Keys!

So, the goal of this whole thing is to "draw attention to the need for
proper buoyancy control"?

Then why the continued effort to make mandatory checkout dives
palatable?

It's been years since I had those wonderful hassle-free dives with
Quiessence in Key Largo. Seems like that may end up being the "good old
days" if you have your way.

Regards,

Dave C

captkeywest wrote:
snip

>So if a checkout
> program becomes reality I would expect it to be associated with each
> individuals certifying agencies recommendations....

Now you're really getting scary.... "if a checkout program becomes a
reality".... What is the Master Plan?

Could it be any more arbitrary than to use the recommendations of the
individual's certifying agency? How did they come up with those
guidelines, I wonder? Legal department memo, maybe.

> A yearly checkout dive shouldn't put a burr in anybodies swimsuit!

I'm guessing you _know_ that's not the case, because many people don't
like _unnecessary_ losses of freedom, however small, as each small
incremental loss adds up, if only in annoyance.

And I'm guessing that you would want to require ALL dive operations in
your area to mandate these checkout dives, not allowing an operation to
opt out and gain advantage and increased revenue.

Of course, it wouldn't be long before word got out, even if you didn't
disclose it in ads or websites, prompting divers to go to a different
area, one not so restrictive. The side benefit will be less cattle
boats on the reefs perhaps. At least that would have a more positive
effect than mandatory checkout dives.

> It would not surprise me if Scott left that part out intentionally
> figuring any controversy would likely draw attention to the need for
> proper buoyancy control in the fragile coral reef environment and was
> just exploiting that controversy to try and protect the natural
> resources divers are trying to visit in the Keys!

So, the goal of this whole thing is to "draw attention to the need for
proper buoyancy control"?

Then why the continued effort to make mandatory checkout dives
palatable?

It's been years since I had those wonderful hassle-free dives with
Quiessence in Key Largo. Seems like that may end up being the "good old
days" if you have your way.

Regards,

Dave C

Jer wrote:
> Dan Bracuk wrote:
> > Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> pounded away at his keyboard resulting in:
> > :What's a snorkel? :)
> >
> > It's something you should bring on a Nekton trip, just in case they
> > choose to enforce their own rules.
> >
> > Or, if you are adamant about not having one, take your money
> > elsewhere.
> >
> > Life is so easy when you know the rules in advance.
> >
>
> Gosh, I haven't had one of doze since da kiddie pool daze. I spoze I
> could blow a coupla bucks for the bottom of the gear bag, just in case I
> ever stalk a Nekton. :)

Nah. Just pick up one of those drinking straws you suck from
bottles and tell them that's your snorkel for "experienced divers".

Florida DMs never get wet. They only care about acquiring tans.
They will be impressed by your miniature snorkel.

-- Bob.

Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:


> What's a snorkel? :)


Its that thing that can help keep you from drowning back on the surface
when your chase boat can't find you after a long dive, and you're
wearing a travel BP/Wing that encourages a more "snorkeling-like"
position when you're trying to conserve energy.


-hh

"Dan Bracuk" <NOTbracuk@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:97ebd15o4hnd3sft5k8u0qkl3fdou28jt3@4ax.com...
> "Ross Garrett" <frederickrossgarrett@hotmail.com> pounded away at his
> keyboard resulting in:
> :
> : ?
>
> Any dive shop/boat can set whatever rules they want. Any diver that
> doesn't like the rules can take their money elsewhere.

I was questioning the reason you deemed it necessary to respond to my
original comment, with the same sentiment.