Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: GUNS and stuff--commentary

["Captain Nemo" <vulcania@interpac.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <VBra676539@aol.com>
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2000 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: GUNS and stuff--commentary


> Pat,
>
> Just a reminder (which Ray will whip out pretty quick anyway) to change
the Subject-thread-title when the conversation changes so that someone
coming along behind us can follow one thread or another without all the side
issues. I noticed we were all still rattling on the "guns and stuff"
subject."

Vance,

OK.  What's the title again?  (No joke; it's made so many turns, I've lost
it!)

>
>"Speaking of which, who was fuming about the libertarian trend in our
emails?"

There's been an active debate about "content" lately; so I'm not sure who
you might mean.

"You have to know that most of us are like that, don't you."

In my response to Porpoise (Troy) I defended free-form discussion that is
not irresponsible, divisive, or abusive.  And, to David Buchner, I stated
the belief that dialogue giving insight to psubbers is germain to psubs.
Therefore, I can only surmise that, when you say "you" (although this thread
is originally adressed to "Pat"), you must now be speaking to the group in
general, (not to me in particular); and I will respond to the remainder of
your post from that perspective.

"I was discouraged during the last fire fight (last year?)--not because of
the topic(s), but rather because of the intolerance displayed. Some of the
old keyboards logged off in a huff, others simply dropped into the
background to await a more productive thread. Some new ones have appeared
since then and bumped heads a time or two with no animosity or reprisal. So
what's wrong with that? My boss says a 6% attrition rate is healthy; it
allows room for new ideas and new personalities. I certainly don't speak for
the web page, but I was here when the last blow-up cost us months of
discussion for little more than authoritarian reprisals. And in the end,
with the very best of intentions, it didn't help a bit. Here we are again,
talking about the same thing."

I've seen these same occurances on other similar websites; and yes, it is
discouraging.

> It's all very well to say we should use other forums for this cherished
belief or that hair-brained scheme, but the reality is that the folks on
this line are a disparate bunch meandering more or less in the same
direction and chatting as they go on more or less the same subject. There
are some really bright people here, some enthusiastic tyros, and some real
back yard nut cases. Some have their very own psubs, some will have, others
won't--which doesn't make any difference. Believe it or not,just about every
one of them has a whole bucket full of opinions and ideas and questions. It
strikes me as wasteful and unfriendly to try to filter the input of these
folks with some amorphous subject guide that is, after all, merely one
person's idea of how another person should act or react. The problem with
the filter is that all of us are strong in the individualist category, and
our experiences and ideas come with .... baggage (shocking, isn't it?). It
is hard to spout facts without !
> !
> opinion, and opinions are personality/experience driven, and there you
are, right back where you started. If you ask someone WHAT he believes, they
are hard pressed to respond in a meaningful manner without saying WHY they
believe it. Lots of what we do is simple, irrefutable math. Can't argue
about that, right? Yeah, sure.
>
> For me, it is important to know where this stuff comes from. You have to
know that Phil Nuytton has the strength of his convictions, or that Pat
Regan has strong opinions and the will to carry through. And Jon and Dave
and others. You have to know because these guys have not only sat over a
cold brew and shot the breeze about pressure vessels and cup holders--they
have actually gone back to the shop and built one to hold the other. I like
that. I want to know about people like that. And I don't often care whether
we are talking about the relative merits of Crane seals or about seal
relatives and merit badges. To me, it's all about being a sub crank, the sum
of which is greater than its parts. And we simply wouldn't know so much
about each other without yakking back and forth.
>
> I'll quit the rant, and I apologize to those of you who already knew this,
or don't care. I just would like to avoid the dissention and rifts that
developed last time just because opinions differed. I'll follow the party
line, whatever it is, as long as it suits me; but I'd like to put my nickel
down on the slot marked "p'subs, etc.," and bet that we can have some fun
here while we're at it. I mean, don't you ever wish Suds would tell you what
he sees when he looks out the window in the morning down there in Central
America, or how the trout fishing is in New Zealand, or the beer in Germany,
or what Phil is thinking when he's sitting on the bottom of Vancouver Harbor
in a DW2000 waiting for the Today Show to come up live and invterview him on
national television? I think that's all good stuff, right along with
Poisson's Ratio and O2 flow rates for light work and compensator's for wet
sub battery packs.
>
> Jeez' I'm sorry fellas. I couldn't stop.
> Vance

Easy tiger!  It's alright!

You make a lot of good points.  Too many to respond to here, really.  I can
only submit that the "battles" such as these seem  inherent to all forums
like ours, and therefore apparently reflect a condition prevalent in the
global community.

Life being a question of balance, I can't take a rigid stand for censorship.
I could make a plea for individual good judgment and self-restraint;
however, since judgment is influenced by perception; and because we all  see
things from different perspectives;  I expect that problems like the one
we're discussing now will continue to exist; and all I can do is adapt to
the status quo.

There is duality to just about everything in the universe; and there will be
good and bad in a forum such as PSUBS.  Rather than attempt to wrest one
from the other;  I feel inclined to accept both as interdependent
complimentary aspects in a continuing cycle of thesis versus antithesis,
engendering synthesis; which in turn becomes thesis, opposed by antithesis,
giving rise to synthesis again, and so on and so forth, ad infinitum.

Personally, I can live with that; but it still leaves me spending a lot of
time deleting stuff from my temporary internet files.  Perhaps, if each of
us would take time to consider what we're really fighting for (respect, or
truth?), some of the conflict will abate?  NAAWWW!!!  That would be boring!

So, I guess when I think about it, it's a wild world; and I might as well
like it that way, because it doesn't seem like it's going to change just for
me anytime in the foreseeable future.

And as I accept that, I sense something inside me quietly saying "Welcome to
the human race, Pat".

"Thanks, God; nice to be here.  What kind of sub do you drive?"

VBR,

p the s