Posted by MHK on August 14, 2000 at 15:35:36:
In Reply to: Mike, Mike, Mike . . . posted by SLANG on August 14, 2000 at 14:48:36:
Guys,
This is the most ridiculous thread that I have ever been involved in. With respect to my comments about boats that I charter, you are damn right that I will do whatever I want on MY boats. In my particular case, I would happen to require oe certs for any boat that I charter. I went a pains to specifically state that these would only be applicable to boats that I charter. I also went to great pains to state that I wouldn't expect everyone to follow my requirements. But there is one thing that no matter how stupid this thread get's is that I reserve the right to approve anyone on any of my charters that I designate as invitational. Inherint in the very title of a invitational trip is that you need to be invited. When I run a trip I run the rules. I could care less who likes them or not, it's my trip and I run it any damn way I want.
I also took the pragmatic view in that I understadn that not everyone is in the same position as I am. I do NOT do anything related to scuba for money, NOTHING, NADA, NYET. Everything I do relating to scuba is done for fun and the added benefit being that I run it my way, or no way at all. But I do recognize that there are other's that don't share my luxury and do this for a living. My comments still stand with respect to requiring oe certs for planned penetration, but whethere I require oe certs for my charters has nothing at all to do with the fundamnetal issues we are debating.
In short, just so we are clear, if it's my trip it's my rules. If you don't like my rules go on someone else's trip.
Now in terms of talking about * to date* etc., The Yukon has Not even been sank for one month, but yet three reported cases of DCS and one near fatality ( which formed the basis for this thread ). In terms of track record, you may want to look somewhere else for historical arguements. I simply didn't want to wait until there was a fatality to speak out, I thought I'd take the proactive posotion.
Later