The Purpose of DZ.com's Incidents Forum

[lifewithoutanet 0]

I was prompted to write this by some of the posts I read in the incident thread regarding what happened at SDR in Colorado on Sunday, Oct 16th.

First off: I know nothing of the incident. I do not know the jumper, the circumstances or other jumpers at this DZ. My condolences go out to the jumper and his family...both off and on the DZ. I have read plenty of threads that would serve as an example to why I'm starting this one and some others would be more fitting examples due to the wild speculation they contain. This post has been a long time in the making, but I've refrained in the past. In this case, I take exception to the responses requesting more information after the jumpers involved have respectively declined to answer questions until the official report has been completed.

DZ.com is a community and one in which valuable information is shared in a couple of the forums. Information about an incident is a valuable learning aid. Those who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. This is as true for an individual as it is for a group of people. There's no contesting that. However, participation is voluntary and no one is accountable to this site or the community members. That's what the USPA (for member dropzones) and FAA are for. Morals, ethics, etc. would suggest that one always volunteer this information and the jumpers at SDR are no exceptions, but the sense of entitlement to all the information, "right now", "immediately", "ariba" by those not connected, whenever something happens--as in this incident or any other--more often than not is inappropriate and lacks respect for the jumper and others involved; especially in this case when they have stated that more information will be available following the investigation. In any incident, if there was information that absolutely needed to be shared "right now" ("immediately", "ariba"), we should trust that those involved would get the information out. In this case, they have stated that they will share the information when the investigation has been completed. Let's try and show a little more respect for our fellow jumpers with a little patience.

This is only my opinion and you're welcome to disagree. However, flames, emotional outbursts and destructive comments will not be dignified by a response.
-C.

(Edits for clarity of my point)

[riddler 0]

Quote

In any incident, if there was information that absolutely needed to be shared "right now" ("immediately", "ariba"), we should trust that those involved would get the information out.

Edit - forget my post - I'm not reading well tonight.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[NWFlyer 2]

The flip side is, people are curious.

Absent facts, people will speculate, either publicly, or in their minds. It is human nature to want to know the facts about what happened. It is probably also human nature to wonder "if an entire group of people is keeping their mouths shut about this, are they hiding something?" Note that I'm not saying this is the case in the Canon City incident or any other, for that matter, but people may wonder about a "code of silence."

In this particular incident, I think the jumpers involved have been up front about who they are and why they've decided not to post. I respect that decision.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[lifewithoutanet 0]

Quote

Can you give us an example of information that you need to know right now? Are you planning a night jump tonight?

And that is exactly my point. I can't think of anything that would mandate such demands for information that wouldn't allow for a little patience.

Quote

I think we'll know most of what happened by this weekend. Unless you're planning on jumping before then, that probably will be good enough for you.

By this statement, I'm not sure you got the purpose of my post. I do not agree with the demands for additional information at this time. Or maybe I misinterpretted your last statement and you used "good enough for you" in general, not meaning good enough for me, personally.

-C.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

It's the full moon man.If you notice everyone gets pissy on the forums during the full moon.



In reguards to the incident thread.If your not going to add anything I say don't post anything.There is no point to posting that you are not going to say anything about the incident.I equate that to school yard politics."I have a secret and I'm not going to tell you."

To the people that just have to know.You can wait a couple of days.

[BenHall 0]

I think what it comes down to is this: A safe and experienced skydiver went in and it scares the shit out of all of us. People want to know what happened so they can try to prevent it in the future. Yeah that probably comes off as a little pissy and I hope those posting would realize that and shut the hell up and wait for the report to come out.

[AndyMan 7]

The flipside is that generally, keeping quiet does not help the way people think it will.

For example, people often complain about journalists writing innacurate information. There's no better way to guarantee that they will write innacurate information then by refusing to tell them actually what happened. They will dig until they think they found a grain, and they'll expand on that grain wether it's true or not.

Likewise, people complain about dz.com posters speculating in the incidents thread. There is no better way to guarantee speculation then by refusing to post what actually happened. This is particularly harmfull because at some point, one of the curious reporters mentioned above will find the speculation and print it, then it'll get syndicated nationwide. Double Damage.

One might be tempted to solve the second problem by banning speculation in the incidents forum, or getting rid of the forum entirely. This has two problems. 1), Sangiro owns this site, and he's on the record in the past as not supporting the idea. 2) If people can't speculate in the incidents forum, they'll speculate elsewhere. 3) Even if incorrect, those debates are often important because they make people think.

By far, the easiest way to stop false information from getting printed online and in the press is quite simple: Tell people what happened.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[wmw999 2,587]

There's a difference between trying to hush something up, and a number of people, all of whom know they only have part of the picture, trying to make sure they all saw what they thought they saw.

If they all post their perspective in light of what they know, people will still speculate. Which is fine. But they're less likely to head off to Mars with their speculations.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[skybytch 273]

Quote

There is no point to posting that you are not going to say anything about the incident.I equate that to school yard politics."I have a secret and I'm not going to tell you."

To the people that just have to know.You can wait a couple of days.

I agree with both of these points.

No one has to post anything about anything. Before the internet we had to wait for either phone tag or Skydiving Magazine to find out who/what/where. Because we can get information "right now" online now does not mean we are entitled to that information "right now."

It's okay to have witnessed something and choose not to post about it until it is determined exactly what happened. It's more than okay to not post names until they've been released in the media. But I don't understand posts that say "I saw something but I'm not gonna tell you."

edit to add - Personally, I think speculation is a big part of dissecting an incident to see what lessons we can learn from it. It's been done around bonfires and over beers for years. Playing with what if's and maybe that's is not disrespecting the dead/injured; like it or not if you go in you just became an object lesson for the rest of us.

[Speer 0]

Quote

Personally, I think speculation is a big part of dissecting an incident to see what lessons we can learn from it. It's been done around bonfires and over beers for years. Playing with what if's and maybe that's is not disrespecting the dead/injured; like it or not if you go in you just became an object lesson for the rest of us.

Agreed. I just don't understand the fixation on speculation as an evil to be avoided at all costs... I do understand that the people involved in this incident do not want the incident itself miscast by wrongly assigned "facts". I can wait for the promised info to come regarding this unfortunate incident (SDR fatality).

Waiting to cohesively assemble the witness accounts and observed evidence is perfectly fine with me... but if there are circumstances that are unclear, or have safety ramifications for other jumpers that shouldn't be delayed, speculate away! Clearly state that speculation is to follow, then proceed to discuss possibilities... I see that as a permissible use of any type forum that is intended to educate. As has been indicated numerous times before, when lessons are written in blood, we shouldn't be put off by the pain involved, but owe it to the living, and the deceased, to maximize the value of the lesson...

Russ

Generally, it is your choice; will your life serve as an example... or a warning?

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

In this case, I take exception to the responses requesting more information after the jumpers involved have respectively declined to answer questions until the official report has been completed.

DZ.com is a community and one in which valuable information is shared in a couple of the forums. Information about an incident is a valuable learning aid. Those who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. This is as true for an individual as it is for a group of people. There's no contesting that. However, participation is voluntary and no one is accountable to this site or the community members. That's what the USPA (for member dropzones) and FAA are for. Morals, ethics, etc. would suggest that one always volunteer this information and the jumpers at SDR are no exceptions, but the sense of entitlement to all the information, "right now", "immediately", "ariba" by those not connected, whenever something happens--as in this incident or any other--more often than not is inappropriate and lacks respect for the jumper and others involved; especially in this case when they have stated that more information will be available following the investigation. In any incident, if there was information that absolutely needed to be shared "right now" ("immediately", "ariba"), we should trust that those involved would get the information out. In this case, they have stated that they will share the information when the investigation has been completed. Let's try and show a little more respect for our fellow jumpers with a little patience.

The perceived demand for 'more information, right now' sometimes depends upon who goes in or is injured.

When a more experienced and current jumper goes in, there is usually more of a demand for immediate information than when a new jumper goes in.

The reason for this is because we like to believe that an experienced jumper 'does everything right'. That implies that there must have been some sort of equipment malfunction or unusual situation. With that line of thinking, people want to know right now what the problem was because it could effect them.

As it turns out, not all experienced jumpers that go in, do everything right. Sometimes the mistakes can be lumped into a broad pile of 'same story - different day'. Lots of loss of altitude awareness problems for both experienced and inexperienced jumpers fall into this, whether it's from a hard pull, hung toggle, camera geeking, too low initiation of a swoop or whatever else.

Some of them do everything right. In those cases, the information ought to be disseminated as quickly as possible from whoever has the information.

As an example, there was a jumper that died when a main suspension line hung up on a flap grommet. The jumper did everything right. This jumper was a friend of mine. Afterwards, I did some checking into the malfunction. I found out that it happened several times before, but no one had died because of it. I talked to several manufacturers and all of them commented that they did not realize that it happened that many times before. About two months later, another jumper goes in with a suspension line wrapped around a grommet at a different DZ and on a different rig.
The information needed to get out, so I wrote Line Snags on Grommets
Russian Translation
As the SBs came out, I added those to the article. You, me or anyone else do not have to wait for 'the authorities' to tell us what we see, what we know or what to think.

I disagree with your comment of

Quote

In any incident, if there was information that absolutely needed to be shared "right now" ("immediately", "ariba"), we should trust that those involved would get the information out.

For most accidents, people will get out the information. That is not the case in all accidents. Some DZs do not send in reports to USPA. Some DZOs will pull student gear off a student fatality so that it cannot be inspected by the FAA. Some reports are written poorly and have incomplete information. Even some of the USPA summary reports have been incorrect. Sometimes trends are noticed by the 'unofficial' jumpers. (see above example.)

What I find strange about the thread you mention, is that several people posted something to the effect of 'I was there, know only a little bit, but I'm not going to say anything.' If you are not going to say anything, why make a post saying you are not going to say anything? Why not be silent? I find that to be more bizarre than others 'demanding to know, right now' what happened.

Quote

DZ.com is a community and one in which valuable information is shared in a couple of the forums. Information about an incident is a valuable learning aid. Those who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them.

This comment is true. I'd like to mention that suggestions and tips that get stuffed into a long thread or several threads may be lost to people that come by afterwards. How many times do you see a post that says 'I haven't read the whole thread, but did anyone think about yadda, yadda, yadda?' That point was taken up 2 or 3 pages earlier.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[skypuppy 1]

The problem with this type of attitude is that invariably when you put off discussion of an incident, no report ever comes out. For example, what ever was decided about the tandem fatality on Guam last year? Or the tandem fatality in Hawaii? I haven;t seen anything. The only ones where we actually get final reports are often when the police instigate a criminal investigation, like in the suicide in England a couple of years ago. Otherwise, they fall off the radar and no one ever learns anything from it. Merely by TALKING about it, we learn a lot.
_________________________________________________


------------------------------------------------------------

There's a difference between trying to hush something up, and a number of people, all of whom know they only have part of the picture, trying to make sure they all saw what they thought they saw.
___________________________

And of course the reason the police like to separate witnesses until they can interview them is precisely to stop them from allowing what they saw to become what 'they thought they saw' after talking to all the others on the dive. If they wait more than a day or two they're very likely to start remembering "Oh, yeah, I guess it wasn't 2200, it must have been 1800...' and all sorts of other details could be changed.

I'D REALLY LOVE TO SEE IT WHEN THE FINAL REPORT EVERYONE'S TALKING ABOUT DOES GET POSTED.

I've never seen one yet, why do all these people keep saying to 'wait for the report'? We should be discussing the incident when it happens.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[lifewithoutanet 0]

Quote

The perceived demand for 'more information, right now' sometimes depends upon who goes in or is injured.

When a more experienced and current jumper goes in, there is usually more of a demand for immediate information than when a new jumper goes in.

This is a solid point... And as the Canon City incident thread has grown, we have learned that it was an experienced jumper. Yet, this wasn't the case when the thread began, and if it's current state is any indication (after Billvon's housekeeping...good on ya, Bill), it was 23 hours until we knew the identity of the jumper, at least by these forums.

Still, while this incident prompted me to start this thread, I have seen countless others where the victim's experience has not played into the demand at all, at least initially.

Quote

For most accidents, people will get out the information. That is not the case in all accidents. Some DZs do not send in reports to USPA. Some DZOs will pull student gear off a student fatality so that it cannot be inspected by the FAA.

Dispicable and likely illegal.

Quote

Some reports are written poorly and have incomplete information. Even some of the USPA summary reports have been incorrect. Sometimes trends are noticed by the 'unofficial' jumpers. (see above example.)

I agree with you...however, we're jumping to the conclusion that the jumpers involved are all part of some big cover-up before we've even given them the benefit of the doubt. When the report comes out, if it's incomplete or inconsequential, ask questions, demand answers. But grant them the benefit of the doubt and hold them to it later.

Quote

What I find strange about the thread you mention, is that several people posted something to the effect of 'I was there, know only a little bit, but I'm not going to say anything.' If you are not going to say anything, why make a post saying you are not going to say anything? Why not be silent? I find that to be more bizarre than others 'demanding to know, right now' what happened.

My opinion is that the content of their posts was taken out of context. Saying that they were there adds credibility to their ability to give you the facts...albeit later. It qualifies them as someone who knows the facts, not as someone who's grandstanding.

-C.

[Ron 10]

Quote

whenever something happens--as in this incident or any other--more often than not is inappropriate and lacks respect for the jumper and others involved

And by not telling any information you would be disrespecting the ones left behind.

Many times the only good that comes form an accidnet is that it prevents someone else form dying in the same way.

Quote

And that is exactly my point. I can't think of anything that would mandate such demands for information that wouldn't allow for a little patience.

OK how about if the accident was due to a certain brand of AAD firing and it might be a systemic problem?

Or how about if the accident was due to a particular rig, or a popular modification that was not yet known to be dangerous?

By keeping that type of information quiet you place others at risk.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[lifewithoutanet 0]

Quote

Quote

whenever something happens--as in this incident or any other--more often than not is inappropriate and lacks respect for the jumper and others involved

And by not telling any information you would be disrespecting the ones left behind.

If you're going to quote me, at least grab the whole sentence, qualifying statements or more than just the content you want to skew in order to match the context of your post. What I said was:

"...but the sense of entitlement to all the information, "right now", "immediately", "ariba" by those not connected, whenever something happens--as in this incident or any other--more often than not is inappropriate and lacks respect for the jumper and others involved;"

Quote

OK how about if the accident was due to a certain brand of AAD firing and it might be a systemic problem?

Who on a jump or on an accident scene is capable of qualifying if an AAD has 'failed' or is 'defective'? Those results need to be determined by tests done by qualified technicians...normally the manufacturer. Otherwise, it's just speculation. Rule things out with investigations, don't just jump to all the possibilities of what it could have been. Speculating wildly about the causes without any of the facts is just as disrespectful to those who have left us.

Quote

By keeping that type of information quiet you place others at risk.

No one said that they wouldn't share the information. They simply stepped up and said "we will, but we're going to make sure the official investigation is completed first." They're accountable to the USPA, FAA, NTSB...not you, yet they're willing to share the information. It's just not on your timetable.

-C.

[jlmiracle 7]

Quote

No one said that they wouldn't share the information. They simply stepped up and said "we will, but we're going to make sure the official investigation is completed first." They're accountable to the USPA, FAA, NTSB...not you, yet they're willing to share the information. It's just not on your timetable.

Then why do they bother to get on there and say I was on the jump but I'm not talking. If they don't want to talk then DONT, don't say anything at all.

How many posts were from people who where there that said they weren't going to say anything. just silly


j

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[lifewithoutanet 0]

Quote

Then why do they bother to get on there and say I was on the jump but I'm not talking. If they don't want to talk then DONT, don't say anything at all.

Because if they say nothing, people jump all over the thread and scream "cover up!"

-C.

[Ron 10]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Then why do they bother to get on there and say I was on the jump but I'm not talking. If they don't want to talk then DONT, don't say anything at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Because if they say nothing, people jump all over the thread and scream "cover up!"

And posting "I was there, but *We decided not to say anything else till the official report is out*" IS a coverup by the very definition.

Quote

If you're going to quote me, at least grab the whole sentence, qualifying statements or more than just the content you want to skew in order to match the context of your post. What I said was:

"...but the sense of entitlement to all the information, "right now", "immediately", "ariba" by those not connected, whenever something happens--as in this incident or any other--more often than not is inappropriate and lacks respect for the jumper and others involved;"

And covering it up is disrespectful to the dead and those left.

Quote

Who on a jump or on an accident scene is capable of qualifying if an AAD has 'failed' or is 'defective'?Those results need to be determined by tests done by qualified technicians...normally the manufacturer.

Simple if we had a guy that was seen pulling at 3 grand and his AAD had fired (Which is easy to tell on the ground)...Then you have info that it misfired without being a rocket scientist. However, when you have people say "I was there, but we are not gonna say anything" You get NOTHING of use.

Quote

Speculating wildly about the causes without any of the facts is just as disrespectful to those who have left us.

Leaving out the facts is just as disrespectful...Hell its MORE disrespectful. AND it can hurt those still alive.

Quote

No one said that they wouldn't share the information. They simply stepped up and said "we will, but we're going to make sure the official investigation is completed first." They're accountable to the USPA, FAA, NTSB...not you, yet they're willing to share the information. It's just not on your timetable.

So if it was a problem with a piece of equipment, you would rather wait till someone else dies instead of informing people of a potential problem?

See how disrespectful that is?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[lifewithoutanet 0]

This has turned into exactly what I was trying to avoid, and even what I was trying to prevent.
Thread over, far as my participation is concerned.
-C.

[NickDG 23]

I think you guys have it all wrong . . .

I think it's good that we know Joe spiraled in with a line over, or Pete whistled in with nothing out, like we used to whisper from DZ to DZ in the old days.

The problem now is DZO's have way too much power concerning what goes on in this sport. Instructors are answerable to everyone from their peers, to the USPA, to the parents, and to our own ability to sleep at night. But, a DZO can come and go with no license, no rating, no nothing, and it's business as usual.

I hear about DZ's close to each other now where if you jump at one you aren't welcome at the other. What the fuck is that all about? And how did we let that happen? Do we jump because there are DZO's or are there DZO's because we jump? This has been plaguing the sport for some time now and it's high time we stopped it . . .

I remember DZO's that lost their shirts year after year and only kept on because they loved skydiving. That dynamic has changed with the advent of tandem and all of sudden you could sell out and make a bundle.

Don't think just because they know your name and you have jumped there before that you aren't being used . . . if you die skydiving they will sell you out to deflect the blame.

Come on, let's wake up, and take back skydiving!

NickD BASE 194

[Ron 10]

Quote

This has turned into exactly what I was trying to avoid, and even what I was trying to prevent.
Thread over, far as my participation is concerned

You were in fact encouraging people to keep secrets...Even if that meant someone else might die.


I'd rather have people say what they saw..Without editing.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[skypuppy 1]

I'd rather have people say what they saw..Without editing.
__________________________________________________

Ditto. I think I like this guy.

Sure we might not know if the aad MISFIRED, but we should know if there were eyewitness reports, that it FIRED.

All we're asking for is the physical facts which were observed, not an analysis of what the guy was thinking, or what someone thought he should have done. Tell us your best observations, and we'll all try to figure what we would do in the same situation.

If nothing else, it makes people think about what CAN go wrong, and some of the ways they can or should deal with it.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[Samurai136 0]

Eyewitness testimony is very unreliable. Especially when the best witness is dead and the next closest witness is likely 1/4 to 1/2 mile away in a skydiving incident.

Things I learned on CSI. First theories are often biased and wrong. It takes time to interpret the physical evidence. It doesn't mean there's a conspiracy of silence.

Ken

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[IanHarrop 42]

Quote

I'd rather have people say what they saw..Without editing.
__________________________________________________

Ditto. I think I like this guy.

Sure we might not know if the aad MISFIRED, but we should know if there were eyewitness reports, that it FIRED.

All we're asking for is the physical facts which were observed, not an analysis of what the guy was thinking, or what someone thought he should have done. Tell us your best observations, and we'll all try to figure what we would do in the same situation.

If nothing else, it makes people think about what CAN go wrong, and some of the ways they can or should deal with it.

The problems with eyewitness testimony:

http://www.brandonsun.com/story.php?story_id=7669

I think what some are concerned about is the fact that what people think they saw may not be correct.

So they want to wait for the facts to be gathered and digested and some sort of picture to be developed that describes what really happened, as best we know. That's what the investigations done by professionals at the scene are for.

I am not so sure that arm chair quarterbacking by people on the internet will get us accurate understandings of what happened and it's that the in-accurate analysis that scares everyone. They don't want to say the wrong thing and get everybody going down the wrong path or get everybody's panties in a knot for the wrong reasons.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Because if they say nothing, people jump all over the thread and scream "cover up!"

-C

They sure prevented that.

Not every fatality goes down the way the 'official report" says. I can think of one high profile fatality in which the eyewitness I spoke to had a completely different version of events immediately prior to impact.

Not being there, I don't know which version of the accident was true (so please don't ask for more details), but I know they couldn't have both happened.

Point is, when all the eyewitnesses wait to offer details until they get their story straight, it makes for poor appearances, even if the intentions are good.