[Article] Martin Stepanek: It's Not About Me

[trux]

I apologize for the injustice, Paul. Gaiadiver probably did another dirty trick and made it again look like you. That only proves that sharing a PC with strangers may not be always safe.

 

[Fondueset]

I choose to believe that Paul is indeed an arch-whimsical nether-villain; even if he does post under his own name - at the very sound which a sensation of nearly paranoid ambivalence almost makes it up my spine.
You go Paul!

 

[billieball]

I think Martin's open letter was fabulous and classy.
Paul, were you--by chance--the figure in the grassy knoll?
--Billie

 

[Bill]

'Paul, were you--by chance--the figure in the grassy knoll?'

He's not old enough.

Paul, the reason your detracters and supporters are pi**ed off with you------
You don't write for us enough.

 

[island_sands]

I apologize for the injustice, Paul. Gaiadiver probably did another dirty trick and made it again look like you. That only proves that sharing a PC with strangers may not be always safe.

What makes you think that they are sharing computers? Their i.p. addresses are completely different

 

[kelp princess]

In contrary, I believe AIDA (given the circumstances and present rules) made their best and only possible decision in this case, and the board has shown that they listen to reasonable arguments. Errors and mistakes happen - it is very sad it had the consequences we saw, but to save the situation I am afraid there was no other solution, and I value AIDA's approach highly. The principal reason of this mess (multiple sets of rules) is apparently being handled with, so hopefully we won't see a similar case in future anymore.

well i hope you are right trux, that we won't see any more cases of this messy load :t

perhaps i expect too much, but shouldn't we all? shouldn't we expect more when it comes to world records and groups of people who call themselves "judges" and "experts" and a "board of directors"?

i think i'd have been more satisfied if the whole RULE issue was dealt with more swiftly and a show of public apology for the snafu followed by crisp information distribution, and even a promise to post the new rules on DB? or something to bring them into the real world.
and to prevent it of course would be best, so for the judges to consider the consequences of decisions and evaluate what they are impacting, mull it over more thoughtfully & thoroughly. i agree we all make mistakes but sheeesh

kp

 

[immerlustig]

maybe off-topic, but where is the assumption coming from that paul k is posting as this divefree person whose language and writing skills, low quality of arguments and behaviour on the forum differ massively from pauls?

anyway...

very decent letter of martin and very well said. respect.

roland

 

[jome]

I agree than writing on fake names is a bit lame.

But I also very strongly believe that casting such assumptions without facts is not very nice either. People read and take these things pretty seriously sometimes.

So if there are facts - lay them on the table. Although unless such a person really is lazy enough to use the same computer it may be a hard fact to prove.

Other than that - as long as it is not breaking the forum rules or otherwise civil conduct, let the man/woman rant.

I did appreciate Martin's letter. He has every right to feel a bit bitter, but he keeps it minimal and remains rational. Let us hope his next event goes better on all accounts...

P.S I am seriously thinking of founding a fan club for Paul

 

[Fondueset]

P.S I am seriously thinking of founding a fan club for Paul

Right on! Boris, Natasha and Snidely - move over! There's a new evildoer on the dance floor!

 

[jimdoe2you]

I just read the article and although it was gracious and concerned, it also smacked lightly of sour grapes. One point Martin brought up is essentially very true, and it is that he has "83 CNF" next to his name even if it doesn't have "WR" with it.

I understand the judges decision and perhaps it is a first step forward on clarifying the rules which is the basis of Martin's letter, however I also personally won't discount his achievement based on the tag technicality.

 

[trux]

Yes, I agree with Jome, and apologize for the baseless accusation. Unlike at Gaiadiver's case, this was a blind shot without any proof, and I admit I was already biased because of that story. And do not take me wrong, I still admire Paul's style even if it is often quite bitter or sarcastic - even Gaiadiver was quite funny and entertaining in fact.

So once more, please accept my humble apology for my recent comment about the DIVEFREE@& imposter.

 

[alix.leclerc]

What seems very strange to me is that these days a world record may not represent the deepest dive! And although I agree that rules are extremely important to ensure that no one gets an unfair advantage and all competitors are making a world record attempt under the same conditions, there do seem to be many problems caused with this seemingly complicated system, such that have been outlined in this incident. It's a shame that the whole point of attempting a world record attempt -getting deeper than anyone has been before- is overshadowed by, well by anything at all!

Well done to Martin for being so understanding with AIDA when some might have reacted far more negatively, also for outlining in his opinion the problems facing judges because of the current regulations, and of course for reaching a staggering 83m

At least Martin and other divers that have been in similar situations know that they can achieve these depth, they know they can beat the 'record', and it's just a case of waiting for the rules and regulations to catch them up.

I love the interest that is generated by threads such as this. The freediving community is one of the only sports I know of that actually gets right down to voicing their opinions about important matters such as this. It’s great.

 

[hteas]

What is AIDA doing to improve the situation?
It really needs to be a transparent process if they want to clean up the mess.
Assurances that they are working on it (the check is in the mail) sound rather anemic at this point.
Howard

 

[chrismar]

What is AIDA doing to improve the situation?
It really needs to be a transparent process if they want to clean up the mess.
Assurances that they are working on it (the check is in the mail) sound rather anemic at this point.
Howard

Given this whole problem is because of the complex rules documents, how quickly are you expecting a rewrite by the volunteers?
They've done the best they could in the terrible circumstances that they've put themselves in, sincerely apologized to all concerned and have a plan to move forward and prevent the same happening in the future. What else did you want?

 

[fpernett]

I think that is better to keep the KISS principle in mind. It's important to make difference between rules to make a dive valid and safety rules. In this case lanyard is for safety, you can use another safety measure and the tag is supposed to make the dive valid. So, simpler and clearer rules will make the difference.
On another topic, it's always fun for me, all the mess, for 1 meter more. We can't measure depth with 100% accuracy, there is always an error. For example Suunto D9 has an accuracy of +/- 1%, this means that a -82 meters dive is "really" between 81.18-82.82 AND a -83 meters dive is "really" between 82.17-83.83, so it's possible that the two "different" dives in fact are at the same depth. As far as I know no one has measured the error of a rope. In my opinion a new WR has to be, without any doubt, deeper than the previous

 

[Gunnar]

One point Martin brought up is essentially very true, and it is that he has "83 CNF" next to his name even if it doesn't have "WR" with it.

I read that too. But on the HP of AIDA (Records-History of records) there is a WR next to his name.

Is that a mistake, was that not yet changed on the website?

 

[trux]

I read that too. But on the HP of AIDA (Records-History of records) there is a WR next to his name.

Is that a mistake, was that not yet changed on the website?

Why should it be a mistake? Martin did about a dozen of valid World Records in his career, so he certainly has the right for that label.

 

[Gunnar]

Now is's gone!

Yesterday Martin's name was up first with 83m and "WR" next to it.
Today Martin's name is gone and William's is on top with 82m and "WR".

So I guess the website just wasn't up to date.

 

[Paul Kotik]

That's it? No more? No new developments? I look at the home page of DB, and this thread has gone from the list of Join The Discussion. What did I miss? Is it all settled, then?

 

[Fondueset]

Yup. All settled.