yoink

Members
  • Content

    4,690
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by yoink

  1. Is it just me that thinks the 'Post New Message' screen is really poorly designed and could do with a functional update? The main point of that screen, the editing window where you actually write your post, only makes up about 1/16th of the total real estate. It's almost like it was supposed to be a 'quick reply' interface you see on some other forums. Why do I need a big chunk of the screen taken up with 'Recent Forum discussions' when I'm writing a new post, for example? Could we not make the window big enough that you can actually keep track of what you're writing? It doesn't even work well on mobile formats at the moment.
  2. yoink

    EPs: Look up before pulling reserve?

    It's not a lack of confidence in a reserve that people have. It's a lack of confidence in how a main will potentially deploy in an untested and continually changeable scenario - in the deployment system itself in a particular configuration. If a cutaway main would always clear a deploying reserve there would be many fewer people suggesting keeping it, but it seems to entangle frequently enough that it causes this debate. I've thought for a while that it's pretty much a 50/50. Do whatever comes to you and hope you get lucky, but of course we can't teach that. Prevention is FAR the best option.
  3. Unfortunately the 'you'll look cool if you can land the Katana rather than stoof in the Velocity' approach doesn't typically work. Their ego will usually tell them 'well, yeah, so if I learn to land the Velocity then I'll be SUPER cool.'
  4. yoink

    Trolling speakers corner

    I the real world I agree with you, but to quote HH, 'this ain't no damn democracy'. I maintain that forcing a change of behavior on the behalf of people who follow the rules in order to facilitate the posting of someone who breaks them is... I don't even know the right word? Irrational? Irritating?
  5. yoink

    Trolling speakers corner

    I think this is where we disagree, Bill. It's not the opinion that generates anger; it's the way the opinion is posted. This is supposed to be a discussion forum - if someone posts their opinion with absolutely no intent of discussing why that opinion is the way it is, providing sources that explain how that opinion was reached or acknowledging that other opinions might have any validity then they're not contributing in a meaningful way to the society here. All they're doing is wasting bandwidth of the site, and the time of anyone who responds. If all I wanted were headlines with no discourse or background I'd check out Fox's RSS feed. I don't need a poster to do that. A very simple script does exactly the same thing. Let's ask this: What is the point of Speakers Corner, for you? Personally, I'd like it to be somewhere where I can understand the viewpoints and thinking of people who I don't necessarily agree with. It's supposed to be educational for me. But someone posting 'the sky is green' over and over and over and over again without explaining how they got to that isn't educational, it's just juvenile. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm expecting too much of the forum, in which case it should be me that goes.
  6. yoink

    Trolling speakers corner

    I think trolling is a persistent and wide-spread behavior pattern, rather than the occasional post that is an aberration to a user's typical posting behavior. Everybody has a viewpoint on something that will be out of whack with others, but specific disagreements aren't trolling. I can have an extreme view on shopping trolley parking (anyone who doesn't return a cart to the little parking place but leaves them in the car spaces should be shot into the sun) for example, but in most other threads I'll be quite reasonable. That isn't trolling - it's just me being a nutcase, but my particular craziness will be confined to a very small subset of threads. But if somebody consistently has a viewpoint so far outside the norm that every thread they post in becomes a clusterfuck, then it can't be anything else BUT trolling, deliberate or not. I do think there is a lot of value in having a forum that splits off the larger noise from the rest of the site, and Speakers Corner does that. I'm not sure losing it would be the way to go unless you ditch the community forums altogether and make this a dedicated skydiving discussion site only.
  7. yoink

    Trolling speakers corner

    This post is going to reference specific posters. Hopefully it doesn't break the forum rules too much, but I don't see any way of posting it without simply being dishonest for the sake of it. This post references: 1: From the forum rules which we all agree to abide by by posting here: 2: Emphasis mine. 3: Specific Speakers Corner rules: The signal to noise ratio in Speakers corner has gotten worse than it's ever been, (and that's saying something). It's all very well having a loser definition of 'troll' for that forum, but when a poster in question has absolutely no intention of considering other viewpoints, providing evidence to back theirs up and has admitted to acting as a troll it's time to do something about it. The answer of everyone else 'just not reading their posts' is bullshit, because there is always someone who engages and that always derails a discussion. Always. And for me, that's a good thing, that people keep trying - it shows HOPE that posters will continue to provide alternative viewpoints and provide content to the forum. Stifling that behavior from posters who haven't broken the rules, just to facilitate the continuation of someone who has and will continue to do so is ass backwards. The point of rules is to have them be impartial, and apply equally and without emotion to everyone. Making exceptions or having 'loser definitions' to rules means that they're not rules - they're guidelines, and a moderation team cannot hope to be consistent with that, even with the best of intention. I understand that banning posters is (in the long run) potentially detrimental to the point of the forum, but some different form of moderation needs to be introduced if the rules in there are different to the rest of the site. The ignore function mentioned a few threads below this one would be a good start. People who troll, or who simply post links to other websites aren't contributing to a discussion and shouldn't be given the leeway they are.
  8. yoink

    ignore button

    Please, please do this.
  9. I'm going to go with 'there's no dropzone that would let you jump again WITHOUT refresher training'. Have fun back in the sky. It's much the same as it was 10 years ago.
  10. What did the canopy coach say about you doing barrel rolls?? I'm guessing it went something along the lines of 'you have to make a very aggressive maneuver on rear risers, and that's really dangerous. Not a good idea.' Fortunately the internet is full of people who aren't the canopy coach, eh?
  11. yoink

    Cilliers Trial UK.

    I'm not sure about the license thing. Technically you're absolutely correct, but the reality is that we ask people to prove their capability despite having a valid license if they've been out of the sport for a while before they get in the air on their own... That implies that a licence does indeed have an expiration or can be revoked if capability can't be shown, doesn't it?
  12. yoink

    Cilliers Trial UK.

    That's part of the FJC. Mark it with a big bullseye.
  13. yoink

    Cilliers Trial UK.

    Understatement of the year.
  14. Even if you have time to turn and land in the direction that fits the DZ policy, Bill? So you stick with a First man down policy always, unless it puts you in danger?
  15. Why?? That's the real issue here. It's not that complicated to follow a first-man-down rule, even if you don't agree with it. Unfortunately without strong enforcement skydivers tend to think policies don't apply to them which is WHY you get people landing in different directions. If you start grounding people for landing in the wrong direction you'd see people start paying a LOT more attention to how people before them are landing. This is another example of how shit we are at self-policing.
  16. Why not? If the second guy follows the first, and the third follows the second it'll translate all the way up. If the policy at the DZ is to follow the first guy down you follow that policy. It's not rocket science - If you don't like it you don't jump. The WORST possible thing that can happen is people deciding under canopy that they're either unsure about the policy or don't agree with it, or deciding to ignore the policy when it's explained to them. We're in danger of splitting this thread - the original post was in response to a specific question. I suggest discussion about which is the RIGHT policy would be best in a separate thread. (FWIW I prefer a fixed tetrahedron on light wind days).
  17. You really should as best as possible. It's the first thing I was taught when learning to drive also. Assume everyone else in the sky (on the road) is a homicidal maniac and fly (drive) to avoid them. If you don't do this, you're handing off control of your survival to people with potentially unknown skill. There's a very small group of people I don't look at with suspicion when I'm under canopy; many with significantly more experience than me are not included. There's a difference between being aware of people and overburdening jumpers with policies and procedures for every possible contingency. It's why we teach students a simplified emergency procedure to cover as many situations as possible. The solution to situations like this isn't to cover every possible error with procedures - it's to remove the error in the first place. DZ sets the policy. Jumpers follow it. Breaking the policy leads to immediate grounding.
  18. You can't plan for someone not following policy, or at least you shouldn't. The DZ has the responsibility to have a policy in light and variable winds and to ensure that all jumpers know what it is. It is the responsibility of the jumper to ensure that they know what the policy is and to follow it. Wolfriverjoe has the right answer for me, so both answers in your poll are correct - just not at the same DZ.
  19. It almost certainly wouldn't during a gear check before emplaning because the lines are all stowed. You wouldn't be able to see a flip through, would you? It SHOULD have been caught by a continuity check during packing.
  20. *Disclaimer - NOT a medical professional. I'd guess the only thing you can do at home is take anti-inflammatories - probably 600 - 800mg per dose of a standard Ibuprofen, or around 500mg of something stronger like Naproxen (although these will need prescription) depending on what the doc says. That and ice packs - lots of 'em. More serious treatments would be like for any inflammation - steroid injections or finally, surgery. You've just got to rest it and let it heal, I'm afraid.
  21. Where's that video of the plane full of skydivers with hypoxia? I've taken a ride in a pressure chamber and seriously doubt it would even cross your mind to get your rig, let alone be able to put it on.
  22. yoink

    Gear Check!

    If you wouldn't jump it you shouldn't put it in an instructional video. It sends the wrong message. It's great you're excited about skydiving, but personally I don't think videos like this are a great idea unless you're an instructor and you're absolutely certain about the information you're imparting. The routing of the bridle not being to manufacturer specs is a good example. You need to have a good reason to suggest an alternative. We've seen people come through here who are absolutely certain that either they can learn skydiving from stuff they've read online, or that their instructors are wrong because of similar. What's your goal of creating this channel?
  23. yoink

    400 jumps velo 111

    Holding a chip on your shoulder for several years, apparently.
  24. yoink

    Open letter to all DZO's

    You are well intentioned, but maybe a bit narrow-minded with your suggestion. Videos depicting screw-ups, injuries, etc. can absolutely make a DZ look bad to those who don't understand the sport. Take large, busy DZ's for example. They may have multiple fatalities and injuries per year, and even when none of them are the fault of the DZ, whuffos still "wonder what the problem is". We don't need videos like the one being discussed here to teach us lessons. Anyone can be taught not to do what this person did without seeing it online. Absolutely.