Doing it OK
or ...
Saving the Baby from the Bathwater

We are Hogarthian, not DIR.

We believe in continual refinement and critical analysis. We don't believe safety comes from orthodoxy. We think for ourselves. This is how the Hogarthian system evolved. Specifically, we have the twin aims of minimalism and safety for our rigging.

• We use doubles with an isolator manifold.
• We use a backplate with a webbing harness.
  • What about quick disconnects?
  • If you want, sure. That's OK.
    The rock climbing argument is specious, as any climber could tell you.
  • What about an extra D-ring? Or two?
  • If you want, sure. That's OK. It's not the end of the world. But don't take more stuff just because you have a D-ring for it, OK?
• We wear our light on our right hip.
• We wear our stages on the left.
  • I can't wear them on both sides?
  • You can do whatever you want. As long as you are thinking things through and taking responsibility for your safety, you're Doing it OK.
• We eschew all-metal-to-metal connections.
  • I don't know what 'eschew' means.
  • That's OK. Check here.
• We don't insist on any particular fins.
  • . . . but minimizing entaglement hazards is just smart. And OK.
• We don't insist you remove the rather useful boot on your tanks
  • . . . but letting your tank rust is Not OK
• We believe there is more than one way to Do it OK.
  • The idea that one setup is ideal for all environments and purposes isn't credible.
• We believe our brains and judgment are our most important tools.
  • Deep air is a bad idea.
  • A dry suit can be risky for backup buoyancy control if we are fully rigged. Responsible use of double bladders can be prudent. All gear requires work to become accustomed to. Put another way: Have you ever tried to neutralize 40+ lbs of negative buoyancy with a drysuit?

Rule #1 We like the original Hogarthian phrasing of "don't dive with unsafe divers". Mostly becaue it puts the primary emphasis on safety, not conformity. Folks who believe those "folks just trying to sell gear" aren't much different from those who simply accept the DIR way. We prefer to think for ourselves. We also prefer to dive with folks who trust themselves, not a system.

• This sounds suspiciously close to DIR . . .
• We believe in adopting good ideas when we see them. How do we know they're good? We judge ideas by their reasonableness, pedigree and applicability. In short, we use our brains. The WKPP has an enviable safety record. Some very accomplished divers use DIR. We've tried DIR setups and liked some, if not all, of the ideas. Why did we try them? We are Hogarthian. We critically examine our diving with an eye on improvement.
• More importantly, we owe some people a big thank you for their asses-on-the-line research and willingness to share the results. Thanks to the WKPP, Bill Main, George, Jarrod and the other less-well-known heroes of this revolution in diving.

Now get over yourselves. Insistence on orthodoxy will only limit adoption of these otherwise cool ideas. People can be trusted to see their merit without hyperbole (eg. non-DIR = Unsafe). Relax a bit and let the market judge.

Especially since you can no longer simply decry others for seeking a profit.

• We are NOT . . .
  • Ultra-committed Explorers ... We're taking responsibility for our own safety. You, yours.
  • saying anyone else shouldn't do any particular thing. ... We ARE pointing out how orthodoxy shuts down progress in diving.

World Leaders Do it OK.	Why not you?
No strenuous workouts!	No Rules Enforcement!

Do you Certify divers as Doing it OK? No. Do you sell merchandise with a cool logo? Not yet, but email us if you'd like to see some. How can I join you? Pay your dues. Read widely. Learn constantly. Get lots of experience. Dive well and often. Dive responsibly, according to your judgment.

---

• Are you really Hogarthian?
• George Irvine has noted the non-DIR trend to using the original term Hogarthian instead of his DIR moniker. For reasons that are obvious to all but the DIR principals, the term "DIR" is counter-productive and just wrong.

  The use of the term "Right" is a weakness that the DIR folks should wish to remediate. It is less than optimal b/c it confuses the issue with an unnecessary confrontation.

  There are other objections to what DIR stands for, but they are in the text.

• Definition of A Stroke
  We think it's the DIR folks who seem to have something to prove.
  At least if the ratio of decibels to content can be trusted.

---

Hogarthian v. DIR: Having an open, but critical mind.

• DIR is finished with its thinking. It is an Orthodoxy.
  • When you can get agreement.
  • Halcyon sells twist-on lights. George Irvine decries these.
  • Some like the Poseidon Odin reg, others don't.
  • It is a standard recommendation not to use the drysuit for buoyancy.
    But it is also considered backup buoyancy in case of BCD failure.
    Why have an emergency procedure you never practice?
• Hogarthian thinking admits there is more than one way to do it.
  • There has to be, or else how would you have got here?
  • Rigidity, calcification and orthodoxy aren't good.
  • The system must be well thought out and integrated.
  • You must strive for minimalism and clean rigging.
  • Ask: What am I trying to accomplish? What factors affect that?

---

• Would a Rock Climber use a Quick Disconnect?
  • No. She or he wouldn't. And that means nothing for divers.
    The loads on a webbing harness and a climbing harness differ by 2 orders of magnitude. It's just not a well thought out analogy.
• Then I should use them?
  • Only if you can accept the risk of a disconnect at the wrong time. Quick disconnect failure is less likely than reg or light failure, but it would be a very bad situation.
• Why would I want a quick disconnect, then?
  • Ever try getting out of a properly-fitting single-piece harness in a hurry?
    Doesn't happen. How would you Do it OK?
• I'm confused.
  • Thinking for yourself doesn't mean things will be easy. Giving yourself over to a system without critical analysis ... that's easy. Simplifying a complex problem ... that's easy. Taking responsibility for yourself? That's hard.
  • OK, here's a couple ideas:
    • Beefy quick disconnects. Maybe even metal ones. It's not that they're better, but they're certainly no worse in practice.
    • Grommets connected by a double-ended boltsnap. Still removable, but much more reliable.