Posting in the incidents forum at WARP SPEED

[LawnDart21 0]

I'm just thinking out loud here. I have noticed more than a few instances in the incidents forum recently where someone expeirences an incident, and before that persons bandaids are even put on in the ER, somone else (typically with no relation or relavance to the incident) is posting the incident to dz.com.

I agree we can all learn from incidents, but given the vast number or recurring incidents (hook turns gone bad), it kind of surprises me that some people feel the need to instantaniously post an incident on here the moment it happens, offen times without all the relative facts or without concern for the emotional impact on the person involved in the incident.

Take a 200 jump "swoop god" who hooks himself in and is staring down a 6 month recovery on his back and thousands of dollars in medical bills, he can rest assure that before he is even out of ICU, his incident will be plastered all over dz.com and as he is mending he can read all about how dumb he was.

There was even an incident recently over a flag jump where the poster apparently upset someone, so much so the poster was contemplating leaving the sport over the conflict it caused.

So my (rant) question is why do people feel the need to post an incident at warp speed the moment it happens? Especially if they were not a key player in the event or don't have the experience to offer a constructive diagnosis of the event.

So I ask then quite literally and seriously, what is it that gives one the right to post an incident? I know that this type information can help save future lives and should be constructively shared to prevent it happening again, but I ask who is it that should be sharing the info and when is it appropriate? I ask becuase I don't have the answer. I just feel bad for all the ICU occupants that get to read about how bad they f'd up before they are even out of the hospital.

I've witnessed numerous incidents over the last 5 years in the sport, yet I posted only 1 of them on here a few years ago, and it was only at the request of the injured party while he was recovering, to disperse the rumors and accusations that were mounting about him on dz.com during his recovery because someone else, uninvolved of course who "heard about ABC at XYZ" that decided the world needed to know about his incident.

Just my .02

Tom

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I'm just thinking out loud here. I have noticed more than a few instances in the incidents forum recently where someone expeirences an incident, and before that persons bandaids are even put on in the ER, somone else (typically with no relation or relavance to the incident) is posting the incident to dz.com.

Better too much info than none. I have suggested int he past that say HH gives 10 folks the ability to START threads in "Incidents". That way if you saw an accident you could PM one of them and they could start the thread. We would not have all these false reports, and there would be a minumum of information needed before a thread would start.

The only ones that bother me are the ones "hidding" accidents.

Quote

So my (rant) question is why do people feel the need to post an incident at warp speed the moment it happens? Especially if they were not a key player in the event or don't have the experience to offer a constructive diagnosis of the event.

You answered this yourself "I know that this type information can help save future lives and should be constructively shared to prevent it happening again".

Quote

I've witnessed numerous incidents over the last 5 years in the sport, yet I posted only 1 of them on here a few years ago, and it was only at the request of the injured party while he was recovering, to disperse the rumors and accusations that were mounting about him on dz.com during his recovery because someone else, uninvolved of course who "heard about ABC at XYZ" that decided the world needed to know about his incident.

Why try to deny that an accident happend? Like I said I like my idea of a few "thread starters". But any info is better than none as long as it is factual.

So a first post should be:
Subject: Walla-Walla skydiving, 5/23/05, no pull.
A jumper had a no pull. Information is not back yet, but it seems to be a medical condition.

Or
Subject: Swooper in Paradise Skydiving Center, 5/23/05, Low turn.
A jumper with 100 jumps on a "Go really fast" 22 sqft canopy turned to low trying to surf the black diamond pond.

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

[billvon 3,031]

>So my (rant) question is why do people feel the need to post an
>incident at warp speed the moment it happens?

Because:

1. It makes them feel important and knowledgeable

2. It pre-empts the first "So what happened at Jumpland last night?" post

3. This is the age of instant information, and other people get mad when things aren't posted instantly. I've actually gotten PM's saying "there's nothing posted about XXX! What are you moderators trying to cover up?"

[LawnDart21 0]

I agree with you 99% Ron.

I just dont think that not posting an incident is "denying" it happened.

I think for alot of people the value of their relationships with the injured jumper is higher than the need to discuss (often times very personal details) with the general skydiving public.

Lets say for example that I witness a swooper crater himself, and in my humble estimation it is a carbon copy of countless other incidents. Do I have an obligation to the greater good of the community to share it, despite the fact it will probably do more harm to the jumper involved than add good to the community for sharing it?

Again I'm just speculating. I see your points and consider them valid, I just dont agree completely.

I like the trhead starter idea too.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I just dont think that not posting an incident is "denying" it happened.

There have been cases where a DZ.commer broke themselves and people tried to keep it quiet. Never works, and just leads to speculation and worry.

Quote

I think for alot of people the value of their relationships with the injured jumper is higher than the need to discuss (often times very personal details) with the general skydiving public.

Lets say for example that I witness a swooper crater himself, and in my humble estimation it is a carbon copy of countless other incidents. Do I have an obligation to the greater good of the community to share it, despite the fact it will probably do more harm to the jumper involved than add good to the community for sharing it?

I'd rather half decent information gets posted than rumors. The sooner info gets out the less rumor and gossip spreads.

I don't think posting facts will do the jumper more harm than good. Its not like THEY don't know they got hurt. Its not like the information will not get out at some point.

I think we owe it to each other to keep each other informed and to keep rumors down.

Long before this site, I was an idiot (OK I am most likely still one, but thats another topic) and I hooked myself in. The rumors were that I had died, been paralyzed ect. People who knew me and heard those rumors freaked out.

Another time I had a friend call me and told me that another friend of mine had bounced....It was till much later I found out it was not her. That kind of pain I would try to save others.....

TRUE information never hurts more than it should.

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

[LawnDart21 0]

Quote

There have been cases where a DZ.commer broke themselves and people tried to keep it quiet.

From what I have read on this site, that usually happens when the incident is more than just a pure accident. Like violating an FAA reg, BSR or demo requirement. I would agree with you there and consider that type of silence "denying an incident".

But in most legitimate incidents, I can't see where not sharing that John Doe skydiver broke L2 & L3, has no insurance, got 7 stitches, etc, etc is denying an incident.

I believe there are a number of valid incident reports that offer clearly defined problems and resolutions that caused the incident and can prevent further incidents. Those should be posted and shared. Again I have no idea by whom though.....

There are also alot of incidents on the forum that are being posted with unnecessary amounts of detail regarding the cause of the incident and the resulting medical complications, without the injured jumpers consent or input.

Do we really need to know if someone has had their spleen removed? Does that foster learning?

So I guess I'd ask again, if John Doe gets life flighted out of a DZ that I am at, and I dont feel it is my place to share it with the world on DZ.com does that constitute denying the incident? I see it as just respecting the privacy of that person.

I dunno. I agree with alot of what you said.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[bkdice 0]

I've wondered the same thing.

Like this post. I jump at this DZ where this accident happened. We are a small DZ. We all know eachother - yet none of us know who this poster is and why he'd post something so vague - and so quickly (6:43 EDT the morning after the accident).

I like Ron's idea:

Quote

I have suggested int he past that say HH gives 10 folks the ability to START threads in "Incidents". That way if you saw an accident you could PM one of them and they could start the thread. We would not have all these false reports, and there would be a minumum of information needed before a thread would start.

I am interested in learning from incidents and getting facts and comments / insight from knowledgeable people. I know I much prefer to not have to wade through random and / or incorrect information and a lot of speculation before getting to the facts.

[Ron 10]

Quote

From what I have read on this site, that usually happens when the incident is more than just a pure accident.

There was at least one case on here of a guy hooking it in and no one would talk about it. I tried to find it, but I can't. Maybe it got deleted.

Quote

There are also alot of incidents on the forum that are being posted with unnecessary amounts of detail regarding the cause of the incident and the resulting medical complications

I think cause and effect are important. I would LIKE to see the name not used, but I like large amounts of detail.

Quote

Do we really need to know if someone has had their spleen removed? Does that foster learning?

No.

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

[catfishhunter 2]

Quote

So my (rant) question is why do people feel the need to post an incident at warp speed the moment it happens?

It's the Internet Silly!

Why do people post the nonsense they do in the bonfire,, why do they have SO MUCH TIME on their hands to be on DZ.com. When you think about it for a minute it will make sense

MAKE EVERY DAY COUNT
Life is Short and we never know how long we are going to have. We must live life to the fullest EVERY DAY. Everything we do should have a greater purpose.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Lets say for example that I witness a swooper crater himself, and in my humble estimation it is a carbon copy of countless other incidents. Do I have an obligation to the greater good of the community to share it, despite the fact it will probably do more harm to the jumper involved than add good to the community for sharing it?

Even if an accident is a carbon copy, it's beneficial for the greater population to know the frequency. People are more cautious about avoiding an accident type that happens 30 times a year than one that happens only once. It's probably more useful with the injuries that tend to go underreported, as opposed to the fatalities.

But yeah, those vague 4th hand reports don't do much good.

[LawnDart21 0]

There in lies the point I trying to make. What greater good is served by understanding the frequency of an incident versus the additional emotional trauma that it can cause the person involved. With very few exceptions (like gear failiure), knowing the frequency of an incident does not deliver a huge amount of additional benefit in the analysis, where as the emotional impact on the person being posted about is rather large.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[PhreeZone 20]

Actually it does. If you only hear about 1 person hooking low and seriously breaking themselves in a year then you think the incidence rate is pretty low. But if you hear of 50 or 75 people breaking themselves in a year suddenly that type of accident stands out more and you pay more attention it them since they are more common and there for easier to happen to you.

Why fill out an incident report for any thing other then a fatality? With no reporting no one can truely know the scope of an issue.

I once suggested that a injury form similar to the Fatalies one be set up and run seperate databases so that fourm discussion does not need to be held, but at least a basic form and required data can be submitted and analyized then.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[LawnDart21 0]

In your example, most, if not all, of the 50-75 people will get reported as far as I know, to USPA, and then it is analyzed and packaged appropriately every year in Parachutist. If we have faith that all USPA GMs do their due diligence, then all incidents get reported.

Since you picked hooking in, for all intensive puproses, hooking it in is entirely preventable and we have already established a patent flaw in this type of error, "pilot error" in some capacity or another. By your logic, then if another 75 people hook it in and it gets reported, it will increase our understanding of this type of incident, beyond what we learned from the first 75 people.

In truth, if 75 more people hook it in making your example 150 total, we will learn very little additional information, than we did from the first 75. In this incident type, most all that can be learned has been learned. So, I go back to the 1st question. What additional benefit does the 76th or 77th hook turn incident provide us? Very little. But it will it have a big impact on the person being cast out over the internet. Thats my point.

I agree with you certain frequencies can provide insight, but what about the right to privacy of the injured or deceased when the added insight to be gained is only nominal, as it is in hook turn incidents at this point?

A woman in another thread threatened to sue dz.com over a potential misrepresentation of a demo jump. Where does it stop?

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[Lindsey 0]

IMHO....if a person is so traumatized by people knowing about, and commenting about, his or her incident that the person "almost leaves the sport," then they either need to grow some thicker skin or move along.... The jumper's feelings are about the last reason I can think of not to discuss any incident.

linz

Quote

There in lies the point I trying to make. What greater good is served by understanding the frequency of an incident versus the additional emotional trauma that it can cause the person involved. With very few exceptions (like gear failiure), knowing the frequency of an incident does not deliver a huge amount of additional benefit in the analysis, where as the emotional impact on the person being posted about is rather large.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[LawnDart21 0]

Messgae getting blurry. Two different people.

In that example of the person considering leaving the sport, that was someone that posted an incident, not the person involved in the incident.

All I'm saying is that alot of times the person involved in the actual incident gets thrown in front ofthe forum whilest they cannot speak for themselves cuase they are in the hospital.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[PhreeZone 20]

Quote

If we have faith that all USPA GMs do their due diligence, then all incidents get reported.

You have more faith in the DZ's then I do. All the incident reports are to be published monthly in Parachutist but the total list there is only a fraction on the list that make it to DZ.com in the same time peroid.

I'm all for name scrubbing, but honestly with a global community once someone finds out that there was an incident at SwoopySwoop DZ, someone on here will have a friend there and will ask for the name to make sure their friend is ok.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[wuffo 1]

Quote

... for all intensive puproses ...

I love it when people use the English language like this. What you meant to use is the phrase "for all intents and purposes"

Sorry, I just couldn't help it.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

A woman in another thread threatened to sue dz.com over a potential misrepresentation of a demo jump. Where does it stop?

But that was a pretty weird situation, with lots of unfounded accusations. An accident is a factual event - it happened without a doubt.

Should people have a right to some privacy for events at a dropzone? Dunno, but I don't know any sport that maintains accident reports that effectively manages to do so.

[LawnDart21 0]

Quote

for all intensive puproses

And my verbal score on the SAT was 640 too.......

And to think I used to be a cunning linguist.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[Erroll 80]

Quote

Quote

for all intensive puproses

And my verbal score on the SAT was 640 too.......

And to think I used to be a cunning linguist.

Given the subject matter, perhaps 'intensive' is an appropriate Freudian slip?