What to share?

[Angus]

I was just reading the negative dive thread in the training category (great thread!) again because the discussion about what to share or not to share based on how potentially dangerous the techinque is has been bugging me for some reason. I finally figured it out. Much of that discussion and others has to do with the threat of injury and death; which is an essential discussion.

However another issue of what to share about techniques has to do with how we support each other and our sport. If someone pays for and participates in a freediving course and then shares much of what they learned on this forum we (not just the person who is sharing the information but all of us who use that information) are creating several problems.

First, this process devalues the efforts of those people who have developed the information, curricullums, and organization to provide courses. Second the person sharing the information is implying a level of expertise based on these efforts by others that makes it appear as if they are at the same competency level. Further, it may put the trainers at risk if their techniques are misrepresented (as will happen without any intention to do so) which would extend the risk of liability to the forum.

Simple respect and courtesy requires us to respect the ownership of information. It is one thing if the information is already in the public domain and readily accessible at a level similar to this forum. However, information that may still be in the public domain but is much more difficult to come by that is used in a freediving course needs to be treated like information that is proprietary. An example of this would be information that is very esoteric, limited in publication, and integrated into similar information to produce a comprehensive component of the training that is unique. Any proprietary information needs not to shared, period.

I feel strongly about this as I think that these training programs are vital to the development of our sport. I suggest that any information on specifics at these levels not be shared unless one has permission from the owner of that information to share that information . If we undermine the ability of the course developers to financially benefit from their efforts; either by limiting the numbers of clients who will pay for their expertise or by creating a level of liability that makes providing this type of course to risky, this will limit the number of people who will be diving safely and demonstrating healthy techinques for others.

I would like to hear from others on this so we can formulate a consensus based policy on the sharing of training information for this forum. Consensus is essential for this because we need to protect the free exchange of ideas and information without harming others or limiting this free exchange. The ability to talk about what one has learned from these courses is equally vital to helping support them as it lets others know of the value an merit of the course in relationship to ones goals. For example when Cliff or Anderson report immense improvements after a few days of intensive training with an expert that indicates the value of this without sharing information that is not theres to share in public forum. (Sharing information with a buddy is an entirely different issue.)

So to kick off some of the discussion I have a modest proposal. I suggest that we not share explicit information from a training for minimum of one year post training and that we give credit to the training/trainer and that we post a disclaimer in which we acknowledge that we are speaking only for ourselves.

 

[Cliff Etzel]

Thank You...

Finally - someone else who feels the way I do...

I have been keeping quiet due to how I felt on much of the information that was being presented regarding training and All I got was flames due to my "with-holding" information or being "elitist".

I was really squirming on much of this after attending the Performance Freedive Clinic in October.

Thanks Mark for the proposal...

I think you put it in terms that others will understand better.

 

[fjohnson]

I want to be everybodys buddy.

 

[cjborgert]

Let's be honest about this

I certainly agree that it is unethical to attend someone's course and then attempt to disseminate what one learns there to a broad audience via a forum such as this.

However, it is quite possible to agree with the notion of protecting intellectual property yet strongly disagree with the notion of withholding information due to it's perceived "advanced" and "dangerous" nature*.

Unless Kirk Krack, or Tanya Streeter, or Brett LeMaster or someone else INVENTED the negative pressure dive and that technique is available only from the sole proprietor at one of his or her courses, I don't think the subjects are related.

I also think it is rather misleading to imply that the subjects were somehow inextricably linked when in fact, the original debate occurred over free discussion vs. censorship, not protection of intellectual property.

Cliff raises an issue that I do think needs to be discussed and upon which consensus should be built, and that is whether there is a distinction between "disagreeing" and "flaming".

I have been operating under the assumption that disagreement, even strong disagreement in which the weaknesses of other arguments are exposed, is considered a lively debate. On the contrary, "flaming" means personal attacks and otherwise disrespectful treatment.

Cliff has said a number of times that he gets "flamed", but I see only disagreement with his ideas rather than personal attacks or disrespect for him as a person. Am I confused about the definition of flaming, or do I simply need to learn that disagreeing, at least with some people, is considered improper etiquette?

 

[fjohnson]

Now that I have more time to write...

Cliff and Angus, I've often had these same thoughts.. but not being in the know or one who has attended a clinic.....

I think reading about all these different technics that someone may or may not have learned at a clinic could lead a person to realize just how valuable going to a clinic might be. I also think that those that have this insatiable yearning for a higher learning would still see that a clinic... even if they only learned one more thing... would still reap a benefit and most likely still be satisfied with that one more bit of information. I hope the implication is not that everything there is to learn at a freediving clinic can be learned here at DB. If that's the case than I guess my reason to go to a clinic would have to be because I would most likely be assured of having a good, responsible instructor and buddy to dive with and also anyone paying for a clinic would most likely have that same insatiable hunger for more knowledge about this sport of freediving... that same isatiable hunger that seems to occupy most of my free time. You could liken this thread to someone who has taken lots of computer courses and then frequents the technical boards that fields computer questions..and shares thier knowledge.. is it fair to those that are giving the computer classes? I see what you're all saying.. but if in my regimem of going to the pool and training causes a question to arrise and I post it here on the board... I'd sure appreciate an answer.. even if it means divulging some sacred secret... or send me an e-mail.

Fred

 

[Cliff Etzel]

What is considered Flaming???

I think you raise an interesting question about what is "flaming".

As anyone will attest to , one persons view of flaming is anothers POV of just disagreeing. It is difficult to discern which it is. From my POV - I have felt like I have been flamed. But as you pointed out, you felt it was disagreement. As I have experienced first hand, text messages tend to have a very impersonal tone, and what was said in a response can, alot of times, be misinterpereted due to that very impersonal nature of the medium.

I totally understand the issue of what some may consider witholding information or being secretive. My past experiences have been that of being "milked" for information and then someone else claiming it for themselves, after my doing all of the work. I have become very gun shy in relating hard earned information about the sport when I feel others should be doing the same amount of work as well. I may be totally off, and if I am, I apologize in advance. But it is my Point Of View.

The sport has become very convoluted in its dispensing of appropriate information - enough to interest those wanting to get involved in it, but trying to draw the line with giving information, that without proper guidance, could lead to injury or death. And defining that line is tricky.

I am sure that neither Kirk nor Tanya would profess as to having invented or developed negative pressure diving techniques, for example, but then again, who did? They have begun teaching this and many other more advanced techniques to those who are willing to spend the time and resources (read $$$) necessary to learn them first hand, so that they are practiced correctly. That is where the necessity of witholding this kind of information comes into play. Without proper guidance in the implementation of an important skill like negative pressure diving, you end up very likely a casualty from doing the skill incorrectly.

Now this may sound harsh, and it is my personal opinion, but why should I, or anyone else for that matter, dispense information to others who are, for whatever reason, not willing or able to attend a clinic and learn the proper procedures of these skills themselves?

Sure, you can say that the sport needs to have this kind of information out in the public, but I have to disagree on this. You don't see the information about scuba diving available to the general public - they have to take a cert course in order to be shown the proper way of doing a skill. The same should be for freediving as well.

People are always wanting something for nothing it seems... It grates on my nerves. "Tell me what you learned so I don't have to pay to go myself..."

I agree though that the giving of information is critical for many to keep them interested in the sport. I view it as a way to measure myself - to see what I am capable of. I have no great asperations of attempting any records, but having been in the formal instructional setting of scuba classes, I have a strong concern for those dispensing advice on advanced techniques.

But then again, what one person considers advanced skills, another would view as entry level. Again, the issue of whose POV it is coming from.

So, I hope that my comments aren't taken as an attack on any one person. They were never intended as such. I just feel a certain way - whether one agrees or disagree's, I guess, is a matter of choice for anyone who reads this long winded diatribe.

I think I'll go back into my cave now and be quiet and see what comes of this... :mute

 

[cjborgert]

I invented it!

Well, just to clear the air, I invented the negative pressure dive when I was 11 years old.

A bunch of us used to stay after swim practice to fool around doing 'strange stroke' races and anything else to challenge one another. During those sessions, I discovered that exhaling all my air before swimming to the bottom of the diving well made it feel as if I were running out of air almost immediately and that my chest was collapsing and my head imploding. I made it one of our races, and I used to win most of them until others figured out that if they didn't exhale all the way, they felt better and made it down and back faster . . . that's why there are so many officials at a swim meet . . . swimmmers will cheat every time if you give them half a chance.

So there you have it . . . the invention of the negative pressure dive.

Now, being the magnanimous guy I am, I don't expect any royalties from Kirk or Tanya or Pipin, and everyone has my permission to discuss my technique with anyone they wish. . . . just be sure to tell them it can be very dangerous and it would be a good idea to get some professional training to learn how to do it effectively as well as safely. [I'm now in a different profession, so don't ask me.]

And about flaming Cliff, you didn't answer my question. You simply said you "felt flamed" (is that like an inflammation?). We need something more objective than that to use a guide for responding to one another. Otherwise, it seems that any time I disagree with you I may be charged with being disrespectful or calling you names (you did not disagree with my definition of 'flaming,' so I assume it is essentially your understanding as well.)

I'll refer anyone interested in this debate to my post under "Freediving as a fad" where I used variations on the words Cliff quoted as the source of his 'feeling flamed' (i.e., "withheld" and "elite"). I would very much appreciate someone explaining to me what name I called Cliff or how I was disrespectful to him in that post.

By the way, Karma is not working because despite my loathesome breach of etiquette, the karma on that post was quite positive.

 

[Angus]

Get past it!

Look guys, when I started this thread the focus was to discuss how to share information that may or may not be ours to share. I reread my initial post and it seems clear that I was talking about supporting the people who are making an effort to produce a course in freediving.

It is also clear that I was attempting to separate this discussion from the previous one and stated clearly that this was separete issue which does not "imply" a connection. There is an important difference between an implication and inference; namely the speaker implies and the listener infers. Any attempts to connect this to other threads is inferred by the listenner and is not my implication. Concretely, I want to discuss the how we share information that is the product of someone else.

Deeper Blue does not appear to be in the business of marketing information that is proprietary. As I stated in the initial post some of the information used in these freediving courses is not proprietary and some is. The point of this discussion is to examine how to share information that maybe proprietary, either in originality or by the development of a curricullum.

So could we get past this "negative pressure dive" stuff. There is a whole other thread for that discussion. We can get beyond the negative pressure here as well by focusing on the question at hand. I will restate it again:

Do you think it is appropriate for individuals to attend a training and then share that information as if it was their own or even when giving credit to the course developers but without their permission?

As I also stated, which apparently needs restating, is that the issue of courtesy and respect for others and their endeavors is a factor to this discussion. Remember these are our friends and colleagues and we have the opportunity to take part in creating a wonderfully collaborative sport or we can create derisive, devisive, and miserable feelings which will take much of the fun out this. Imagine going to the World Meet in Hawaii and the pleasure we can have by meeting each and talking and laughing. Or the alternative, in which we huddle in small closed groups and grouse about people in other small closed groups; Whoopee.

So let's move away from specific subjects and talk about some substantive issues here. Here again is my proposal for handling information from trainings that we are uncertain if it is proprietary or not:

I suggest that we not share explicit information from a training for minimum of one year post training and that we give credit to the training/trainer and that we post a disclaimer in which we acknowledge that we are speaking only for ourselves.

 

[Jason DeGraff]

Neg Press dives

Guys , I recall reading a statement that the Hawaiians used to dive to depths by exhaling most of their air and plummeting to depths faster because they sink faster . I've been going through my books looking for this info but it sounds very similar to neg pressure dives, but for a different reason .
It all sounds good . Luckily we have weight belts now !
That's really interesting info about the side effects of negative pressure dives jumpstarting reflex actions , etc . I don't think I'll be trying it anytime soon though . Sorry u guys are all up in arms about it . It's sad that this information has to be censored due to fear . It's just another interesting tecnique for freediving which I find all of them facinating to read about . I guess you could just censor all info and not even have a forum or mag .
The cat's outta the bag now guys . Are you gonna censor stuff that you can find on other websites ? How does that work ? I love Deeperblue because it's so educational - I'm always learning . Have courage !

 

[cjborgert]

Re: Let's be honest about this

Originally posted by cjborgert
I certainly agree that it is unethical to attend someone's course and then attempt to disseminate what one learns there to a broad audience via a forum such as this.
———————————————————————————————————————

I thought I DID respond to your question, Mark, albeit broadly.

I agree with you in general, but in specifics, I don't think it serves a useful purpose to set policies we cannot hope to enforce, regardless of how good and well-intentioned the policy . . . and I do view your suggestion as good and well intentioned . . . I just don't think we could hope to enforce it.

I also question whether a year is appropriate, two years, or never. How did you arrive at that figure? I would have thought the appropriate time period would depend upon the instructor, the particular piece of information, and how widely the instructor feels that his proprietary information has been disseminated already via his/her course. It seems to me this is between the instructor and course attendees rather than the attendees and Deeper Blue.

Having said that, I do think you've served the forum well by pointing out that members should recognize their obligation to respect the proprietary nature of course material. I trust they do. It is probably worth mentioning periodically.

 

[efattah]

My opinion

Whenever I 'divulge' info about freediving on the internet, I always assume that it will be instantly known by the whole world. That's why I don't think that teaching freediving classes can ever be a safe 'secret' way to give away information, even though that would be a fun job. I don't see it as being a profitable job for much longer, because we cannot stop the propagation of information on freediving, just as we cannot stop the propagation of information on scuba diving.

All the 'secrets' of scuba diving are available to people without training. In my case, I have never taken a scuba class. Yet, from the internet, and from hanging around scuba divers and listening, I have learned so much I bet I would come close to passing even an advanced deep-air/nitrox scuba course.

The difference is that despite my 'scuba' knowledge, I am still not allowed to rent a tank or scuba gear, which makes it very difficult for me to scuba dive (if I even wanted to). But, because freediving does not require any gear, you can never prevent someone from freediving.

So, in both sports, all the info is available to those who want it, and it is available for free. The difference is that in scuba diving, it doesn't matter if you know everything; unless you take a course, you'll never get that precious 'cert card' that lets you buy and rent gear.

Despite the availability of information on freediving, I think that 'courses' will always have their place, even if only to provide a safe environment for training, and as a way to see a bunch of different gear you might not get to 'feel out' on the net. Going to a course, even if well educated off the net and from friends, will probably still result in picking up a trick or two that you missed somewhere along the line.

So, I think that any 'rules' or attempts to keep info private will not be successful. Besides, if the aquatic ape theory is true (and believe me it's convincing), then none of us are really 'learning' to freedive; we are just 'remembering' something we should already know. Just as talking and walking are things we should know. And we would not keep the secrets of talking and walking private, to prevent 'teachers' of talking and walking from making a living. Walking, after all, can be dangerous if done improperly; the person could fall and injure himself. Talking too, could be damaging if done too loudly. Eating could result in choking if not done properly.

PS--To my knowledge, negative pressure dives, as an initiator of the mammalian reflex, and as a method to practice equalizing, were first introduced to the modern freediving world in the mid 1980's by Roland Specker. Pipin claims to have independently invented them as well. Probably many people did, including humans a million years ago.


Eric Fattah
BC, C

 

[Stephan Whelan]

The two issues

Hey everyone...I thought we had put this issue to bed, but I see it comes up again. :head

Let me give you my personal opinion on the two topics under discussion...the easy one first:

Flaming - This one is as old as the Internet itself, infact the Jargon File describes it as:

flame 1. /vi./ To post an email message intended to insult and provoke. 2. /vi./ To speak incessantly and/or rabidly on some relatively uninteresting subject or with a patently ridiculous attitude. 3. /vt./ Either of senses 1 or 2, directed with hostility at a particular person or people. 4. /n./ An instance of flaming. When a discussion degenerates into useless controversy, one might tell the participants "Now you're just flaming" or "Stop all that flamage!" to try to get them to cool down (so to speak).

The big problem with flaming is that everyone's idea of it is different. Some people take offense very easily, other's not so. The policy of these forums is as follows (quoted from the Forums Rules):

DON'T ATTACK EACH OTHER
Don't attack others. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Challenge others' points of view and opinions, but do so respectfully and thoughtfully ... without insult and personal attack.

Some lively discussion is fine (including difference of opinion) and to be honest I have yet to see any real personal attacks (which would count as flaming). If in doubt, the user should contact myself or one of the mentors privately for the situation to be dealt with.

Now for the larger subject:

Information Distribution
I have to say that I agree with Eric on this one - almost all the sports you can do have a huge amount of information available on them. Courses, books, leaflets, websites, forums, etc...freediving is the same. Deeper Blue is considered to be one of the best places on the Internet for information and discussion and this is mainly due to the large community of Freedivers we have in here. Everyone from World-Champions to complete novices can engage in moderated discussion.

In all the time these discussions keep going on, I have yet to hear about a thread or post that is actually considered "dangerous" beyond any other information out there. Hence we have never had reason to remove posts or threads as yet...however I do rely on my mentors and moderators to keep me informed of any potentially dangerous, liablous (although this is a totally different discussion) or flaming posts...we would then take appropiate action as dictated by our Forum Rules (and as I have said we have yet to use this privelege).

The issue of posting information we receive in training clinics is a valid one, yet may I point out that no techniques discussed in these forums have really been "patented" by the people who train the courses. Nothing can replace serious training by a top professional - however i'd much prefer advanced techniques were discussed in here where there are other advanced freedivers to help rather than on some other website wihtout the backup of a great community of freedivers!

I will once again repeat the plea I've kept repeating everytime this comes up - let's get beyond this and get discussing the real issues and guts of the sport, not what the legal issues are - because to be honest, it's not really an area that users should be worrying about as i'm the one who gets it in the neck if the lawyers come calling as the registered owner of this website and the associated company behind it (deeperblue.net limited).

 

[Erik]

Hi friends, please allow me to speak to a couple of issues here, given that I was one of the loudest voices against withholding of info.
I don't believe I flamed anyone, but Iwill admit to being passionate about freedom of information.
My karma on that post had one negative reply, saying that I was too harsh; I apologise to anyone offended, but the rest of the karma and private email I got said that I was very well supported.
I learned how to set up doubles and side mounts, how to rig regulators, and how to plan deco dives to over 60 metres inside cold and dark wrecks on the web; granted I am a rec scuba instructor, but I learned and used the info in a way that "they" say I shouldn't. If I was still interested in scuba, I would still use that info, and would be doing 100 metre trimix dives by now, safely. Information will always be disseminated, no matter what people think. And a good thing, because not everyone can afford or have access to good freediving trainers.
Mark, I understand the ethic that you are proposing and I agree to a point. I don't want to remove anyone's way of earning a living, especially a decent guy like Kirk, who spends more time volunteering than anything, but as I have said before, most people who are really pursuing more skill will understand that if they are not achieving "greatness" on their own, then they must go to a Master. I can tell you all day about my techniques, and they might help you, but at some point you're going to have to go to an instructor if you're stuck, or feel as if you're stuck.
When I was a kid I studied all the Bruce Lee movies, ordered the "how to" books out of the comics, and even watched videos to learn some martial arts. I learned some things, but not even an iota of what I learned from a 50 year old Korean 8th Degree Black Belt who had done 3 tours of Vietnam in a special forces unit.
Masters shouldn't worry about their ability to earn a living at what they do, just be happy in what they are doing; the work will come, especially if we acknowledge them and the information and training they shared with us.
So, I would have to say that I don't agree with the proposal to withhold info.
Warmly and respectfully,
Erik Young

 

[Angus]

emerging consensus

Good Morning,

The emerging consensus (it is interesting that this word is derived from the word "consent") is that information from freediving courses, is for the most part, part of the public domain, and therefore free to be shared. I too, have never taken a free diving course (but very much want to) but fortunately many of the contributors are people I trust and respect so I am comfortable with their insights. We still have to be careful and make sure that we are not using copyrighted material.

The nature of consensus is that it alters our individual preferences in a manner that preserves our goals while broading them to include the goals of others. So I am retracting my first proposal and suggesting instead the following:

Share information openly from trainings with full acknowledgment to the trainers coupled with limiting statements that clearly indicate the extent of the persons understanding of the technique's benefits and risks.

 

[fpernett]

unvaluable source

I´m living in Colombia, Me and my country have serious economical problems. Must of what I know about serious freediving comes from Internet. Also me and my brother had developed our own technics. But if I have the money I´ll take a freediving course with Kirk, a good instructor is an unvaluable source of knowledge that can´t be replaced for hours in your computer. Our sport is highly dangerous (as driving) but hidding the information is not the way to keeper safer. All of us, I think, know the risks of our sport. We must understand our limits, and if we want to pass it, it has to be done safely.
Internet was created to share information, don´t forget that idea in a material world. This place, DB, is an oasis for me.

Sincerely

Frank Pernett

 

[icarus pacific]

waah, waaaah...

Again CJB, your articulate thought and humor have caused me to nod my head in agreement.

I think this thread is best put out to pasture with efattah's admission of his understanding that the information he and others disseminate during their seminars is public domain, albeit polished and refined to an extent that the info is "theirs". Very classy to hear that. And to those that claim that their not going to clue in their friends because those friends did'nt pony up the $ I say, "well have a nice time, just don't ask me how to do what I do successfully." To the others, ask away- I'm there for you!

And Cliff... don't confuse flaming with disagreement. Disagreement with a position is what people think, like when they read your early take on diving solo, and then smuggly wait for the revision that your mind has been changed with some more time in the water. Flaming is when someone who knows better tells you that the fish you hold up for the Picasso site is called bait.

 

[Cliff Etzel]

Re: waah, waaaah...

Originally posted by icarus pacific
Flaming is when someone who knows better tells you that the fish you hold up for the Picasso site is called bait.

Never professed to be the great white hunter... Far from it

LOL!rofl