-Joey-

Please don't let one troll run you off. You'll be missing out on a lot of good information and things to think and ask about. Please stop referring to those who disagree with you as trolls. If your definition of a troll is anyone who disagrees with you, then you clearly don't know what a troll is. Skydiving is serious business

Cool story bro Skydiving is serious business

As I predicted, nobody has any statistical evidence to back up their camera fear-mongering. And everyone is just making up excuses as to why the evidence doesn't exist. Instead, we only have ad hominems and posts calling into question my experience, instead of refuting my argument. Game, set, match. No point in continuing this thread. Skydiving is serious business

more like... Lots of ad hominem attacks / personal insults Lots of appeal to majority fallacies ("look how many people disagree with you") Zero statistical data corroborating the fear-mongering Yup, pretty sure I've won this debate by a wide margin. Skydiving is serious business

Show me the statistics Skydiving is serious business

But like I said, all incident data only reflects what is reported. So camera incidents as a PERCENTAGE of total incidents will still be the same. If it's true that cameras are a significant contributor to incidents, then there should be quantitative data to back it up. That was just when I was pissed off. It was an out-of-character post. My "attitude" is that if someone is going to advocate for more draconian policies toward something that they claim causes incidents, then they better have quantitative data to back up their claims. SHOW ME THE STATISTICS that prove it's a major contributor to incidents. Nobody in any of these camera-hate-threads has been able to do that. Skydiving is serious business

The difference is that nobody does that, so there is no data to go by. People have jumped small-format cameras ever since they were invented, but there is still relatively little data to suggest that they are a significant contributor to incidents, on the level of the other major contributors to incidents. If you wish to refute this, then I repeat myself once again: SHOW ME THE STATISTICS. Lol are you serious about bounce bingo? Because I think it's okay to jump a Contour after 50 jumps (which my DZ does too)? That's insane. I'm not one of the ones swooping a velo with low jump numbers. I have a relatively docile main, and have a contour that I won't even be able to use until my Cookie Fuel helmet arrives in the mail. Skydiving is serious business

Did you know stooping to ad hominem attacks is one of the prime indicators you've lost an argument? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you've lost outright at this point; the final nail in the coffin is yet to be hammered in. What I want from the next person posting from the "OMG KIDZ WITH CAMERAS ARE GONNA KILL US ALL" bandwagon is some actual statistical data in support of their claim. SHOW ME THE STATISTICS. When the USPA put out a bunch of fear-mongering about tail-strikes in order to scare everyone into voting for their standardized wingsuit instructor program, this community correctly pointed out that the statistical data (actual number of tail strikes compared to total wingsuit jumps) didn't corroborate their propaganda. I'm saying the same thing. Show me the actual number of reported fatalities, injuries, or other serious incidents that directly resulted from flying a small-format camera (the jumper happening to have had a camera during an incident caused by something else doesn't count) side-by-side with total jumps as well as total number of incidents. I posit that the number of incidents caused by low cutaways, low turns, and no pulls are still vastly disproportionate to the number of incidents directly caused by having a small format camera. A good look through the fatalities database and the incidents forum is clear evidence of this. Think I'm wrong? SHOW ME THE STATISTICS. And don't give me the BS line of "oh those are just the ones that are reported lol." Because that also applies to every other kind of incident as well. So the camera incidents as a percentage of total incidents will still be the same. The ball is in your court. SHOW ME THE STATISTICS that prove that having a small-format camera on a helmet causes just as many problems as radical downsizing or not knowing EP's and I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. But I don't believe the data supports the fear-mongering. Skydiving is serious business

A whole lot of them weren't even camera-related. They were just incidents where the jumper happened to have a camera, but the incident had nothing to do with the camera. Skydiving is serious business

Like the people fussing about cameras Skydiving is serious business

Well I respect your right to your views and will take them into consideration

Yeah yeah yeah and I need to go watch Sangi's bounce video... already seen it. I'm not planning on initiating any 270's at 200 feet and not pulling out even when the sight picture looks wrong so I think I'm okay there besides that has nothing to do with cameras. I still stand by my observation that camera-related issues are not a significant contributor to incidents. Just browsing the first couple pages of the incidents forum there are no camera-related issues at all. Just a bunch more no pulls / low cutaways / low turns. This camera thing is being way overblown and the hype is disproportionate to the actual number of incidents. Skydiving is serious business

Whoa, where did I say you did any of those things? I said it's something I've perceived in general. I wasn't specifically addressing you. If you want a good example, look at the OP's post. He specifically mentions "kids" with cameras, but doesn't say anything about "adults." Jump numbers aside, there's a bias against younger jumpers present there, whether the OP realizes it or not. Another example is in the Safety Check article in this month's Parachutist where the author makes a remark about "try[ing] stuff without adult supervision." I listen to people who give me advice too. I solicit it all the time, and often pay for it in the form of coaching. Obviously if I wasn't willing to listen to advice I wouldn't be shelling out cash for it. What I don't listen to however is when someone gets up on their high horse and starts preaching down to me especially when I have not solicited it. I won't listen to someone like that whether they have 20 jumps or 20,000. Skydiving is serious business

I don't care about your experience, I want to see mik's, and his license number. And I care more about his blatant hypocrisy than whether his info is true. But he's being pissy about me having bogus info (of course I do, this is the internet) while he clearly has bogus info. But again, it's not his bogus info that I'm calling him out on, it's his hypocrisy. It shouldn't matter anyway. The "kids" in this sport deserve the same level of respect as everyone else, but I sense that many older jumpers have utter disdain for younger newer ones, regardless of jump numbers. It becomes obvious when they use phrases like "kids with GoPros" (as if all camera flyers are kids) or try to use "kid" as a put-down, as mik did. What's really going on here has nothing to do with camera safety, it's really just about animosity toward young people. The older folks don't like that they are losing their exclusivity in the sport as it's becoming more accessible. Skydiving is serious business

Troll deleted. Leaving the rest of the thread up in case it's of value to someone. We will see. Skydiving is serious business

My response was equal in magnitude to mik's response, so if I violated any rules, he definitely did. Skydiving is serious business

Wow... what happened that made you become such a douche? Did your wife bang some other guy? 1. You have no idea how old I am, so stfu about me being a "kid." For your information, I'm not. But from now on I will suspect you are. 2. Thanks for letting everyone know that you don't care if somebody dies. If anything that adequately demonstrates how much of a dick you are, and says nothing about me. 3. You have no idea how long I've been in this sport. 4. There is no requirement that I list real info in my profile. There's no way your license number is really 11111. You're whining about the info in my profile while you clearly have fake info in your profile! 5. Can you please shut up until you gain some experience? Cause I don't believe you have 1600 jumps either. If you do, prove you're not a hypocrite and show us your log book. Now go get some jumps so you can hurry up and earn your A license, junior. Good luck on the AFF course. Skydiving is serious business

So instead of taking responsibility for their own incompetence and negligence, they are trying to attack the people who exposed them; in my experience this is how hacking accusations typically work. Skydiving is serious business

Damn... when I saw the title of this thread, I was going to say "Verizon." Skydiving is serious business

OMG a pressure cooker; glad the cops are on the scene. Hope they never discover my kitchen. Skydiving is serious business

You should be using a 7-cell for WS... Skydiving is serious business

Wow, that's creepy... Skydiving is serious business

Yeah Glad you see it my way

He made a decision to backfly without a dytter didn't he? What he did doesn't relate to someone who is doing RW with a camera for example, it's not like everyone in the group is gonna forget to track away because one guy has a camera. It's more situational than jump numbers alone, as with everything else... Skydiving is serious business

Eh... I would but the weather is piss poor right now. So all I can do at the moment to contribute to the skydiving community is post sensible responses to the endless array of threads moaning about the evils of camera flying and downsizing Skydiving is serious business