RIP Wes Skiles

[Raydar]

I'm not a big fan of speculation when someone dies ... but I'm getting a bit tired of going from forum to forum and reading about how the man shouldn't have been diving solo. If you're risk-averse to solo diving, don't do it ... but it's a bit misleading to point to that one aspect of the dive and identify it as the potential cause of death. For all any of us know, a dive buddy may or may not have made any difference at all in the outcome of this accident.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

You are correct. Being part of a dive team might not have made any difference.

It sure as heck wouldn't have hurt though and would have given him a much better chance of surviving whatever happened. At the bare minimum, he could have been brought to the surface instead of being found on the bottom. Solo diving didn't cause his death. Something else happened and solo diving would be a contributing factor.

It's strange how little I care about how other people dive. Diving is a risky sport. There are known ways of reducing the risk. If a person wants to dive solo, deep air, or rebreathers, etc, go for it. Just be prepared to accept the consequences. Hell, if you don the gear and get in the water, you'd better be prepared for any consequences.

There's my 2 cents. I've got to go send out product that people could use to get themselves into trouble.

[Joshua Smith]

OK ... I'm gonna buck the "if only he was diving with a buddy" sentiment here for a moment ... probably because, as someone who DOES dive solo, I've got a bit of a different perspective than those who haven't done it and dive a style that is philosophically dead-set against it.

Diving solo has inherent risks ... so does diving with a buddy ... and if you and your buddy aren't on the same page, buddy diving can have risks that solo diving doesn't. So I don't think the issue is anywhere near that simple.

From what I've read, Wes was diving a borrowed rebreather ... and he was diving with no bailout. Either of those could have been a far more important factor in the accident.

I don't believe that diving solo is significantly more dangerous than diving with a buddy ... if you are properly prepared. Diving a rebreather isn't inherently dangerous. Diving solo on a rebreather you're not intimately familiar with ... particularly without bailout ... could be.

I'm not a big fan of speculation when someone dies ... but I'm getting a bit tired of going from forum to forum and reading about how the man shouldn't have been diving solo. If you're risk-averse to solo diving, don't do it ... but it's a bit misleading to point to that one aspect of the dive and identify it as the potential cause of death. For all any of us know, a dive buddy may or may not have made any difference at all in the outcome of this accident.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

x2.

I just read through the latest National Geographic and looked at Mr Skiles' pics. They're incredible.

[ljjames]

[Grateful Diver]

Diving a rebreather isn't inherently dangerous.

Ah Laura ... that's what Breitbart did to the USDA lady ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[cardiver]

[Joshua Smith]

Diving a rebreather isn't inherently dangerous.

Freaking awesome.

[lamont]

Ah Laura ... that's what Breitbart did to the USDA lady ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Not quite. Even if you take what you wrote in complete context, the warning label on the Meg is very pointedly against solo diving ( with the mentioning of inability to "self-rescue" ) and that is a rebuttal to your argument about not considering solo diving as a factor. So its not like by taking one sentence out of context that it completely reversed your argument.

[Grateful Diver]

Ah Laura ... that's what Breitbart did to the USDA lady ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Not quite. Even if you take what you wrote in complete context, the warning label on the Meg is very pointedly against solo diving ( with the mentioning of inability to "self-rescue" ) and that is a rebuttal to your argument about not considering solo diving as a factor. So its not like by taking one sentence out of context that it completely reversed your argument.

Curious if those in here who use rebreathers have similar warnings on their units.

I still believe that we shouldn't be using this death as an excuse to get on the anti-solo diving bandwagon.

Frankly ... none of you have any idea why he died ... or whether having a buddy would've saved him.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[John Rawlings]

Ah Laura ... that's what Breitbart did to the USDA lady ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Not quite. Even if you take what you wrote in complete context, the warning label on the Meg is very pointedly against solo diving ( with the mentioning of inability to "self-rescue" ) and that is a rebuttal to your argument about not considering solo diving as a factor. So its not like by taking one sentence out of context that it completely reversed your argument.

Curious if those in here who use rebreathers have similar warnings on their units.

I still believe that we shouldn't be using this death as an excuse to get on the anti-solo diving bandwagon.

Frankly ... none of you have any idea why he died ... or whether having a buddy would've saved him.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Yes, my KISS has the statement, "THIS DEVICE IS CAPABLE OF KILLING YOU WITHOUT WARNING" imprinted at the top of the head in bold letters. Josh even used a photo of it for a while as his avatar here on NWDC a couple of years ago.

I agree, though, that we should wait to find what actually happened medically with him and physically with his unit before rushing to "explain Wes' perceived errors in judgement", which, after all, are matters of personal perception. I know that many will roll their eyes at that, but in this case....with a well known personality involved, we are more likely to actually hear about the actual causes of the accident than we would if it had been a relatively unknown person.

As we await that information, we can enjoy his photographs, savor his films, and admire his work in National Geographic (August issue, folks!). Savor his life, folks....there will be time enough for analysis once the facts are presented.

- John

[Raydar]

I still believe that we shouldn't be using this death as an excuse to get on the anti-solo diving bandwagon.

Agreed

[lamont]

I still believe that we shouldn't be using this death as an excuse to get on the anti-solo diving bandwagon.

I'm not particularly anti-solo. I'm not particularly anti-anything. However, we can point at a long list of CCR divers that have died while solo or separated, and that mix seems to be more risky than some people give it credit for. I'm definitely willing to call it out as a contributing factor in this death -- which doesn't mean that i'm anti-solo, doesn't mean that i'm angry at him, doesn't mean that i blame him, doesn't mean that i think CCR solo divers are all evil or stupid -- but if you don't see the correlation between CCR fatalities and solo diving, i think you're being a little bit blind. Combining solo diving with CCRs is an added risk on top of an added risk.

So, I definitely will bring up solo diving as an added risk factor with CCR diving every time a death like this occurs. From my perspective claiming that I'm using this death as an 'excuse' is really itself just an excuse to avoid looking at all the evidence and be willfully blind. If you can't look at all the solo diving CCR deaths in order to consider the relative safety/risk of solo diving with CCRs, then by setting the boundaries of what is permissible to mention you've determined the outcome of the debate -- if you can't talk about all the negative outcomes then no activity is risky. Running blindfolded across I-5 could be shown to be perfectly safe as long as you've got one example of it being done safely and you can't talk about anyone getting clobbered by a car (because that would be using their death as an 'excuse' to discuss the risks of running in highway traffic).

At what point do we have enough fatalities to be able to look dispassionately at the fatalities and decide that we need to add a new point the rules of accident analysis? Based on the recent threads about the fatality in florida it seems like not only are we not making any forwards progress, but people are willing to throw away everything that Sheck did with accident analysis and we now can no longer talk openly about divers violating gas rules, diving over their training, not maintaining a continuous guideline, etc. Those things apparently don't kill cave divers any more because we can't talk about them after the fatalities occur.

This isn't going to end well. If we don't find some kind of compromise between the anti-speculation and the accident-analysis crowd, we're heading down the path of not only not learning anything new from fatalities, but throwing away everything that we've learned.

[CaptnJack]

This isn't going to end well. If we don't find some kind of compromise between the anti-speculation and the accident-analysis crowd, we're heading down the path of not only not learning anything new from fatalities, but throwing everything that we've learned.

Yeah its been over a year and still essentially nada about Carl Spencer (famous, no buddy around either).

[ljjames]

that label comes already applied, from the factory. it is right next to the 'on/off' switch on the meg eCCR.

in fact, you can buy a matching T-Shirt from the innerspace booth at the trade shows, right under a big sign that says the same.

Ah Laura ... that's what Breitbart did to the USDA lady ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Not quite. Even if you take what you wrote in complete context, the warning label on the Meg is very pointedly against solo diving ( with the mentioning of inability to "self-rescue" ) and that is a rebuttal to your argument about not considering solo diving as a factor. So its not like by taking one sentence out of context that it completely reversed your argument.

Curious if those in here who use rebreathers have similar warnings on their units.

I still believe that we shouldn't be using this death as an excuse to get on the anti-solo diving bandwagon.

Frankly ... none of you have any idea why he died ... or whether having a buddy would've saved him.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[John Rawlings]

If we don't find some kind of compromise between the anti-speculation and the accident-analysis crowd, we're heading down the path of not only not learning anything new from fatalities, but throwing away everything that we've learned.

With all due respect, I believe that by creating those two classifications you are doing both "groups" a disservice. I believe that those you wish to label as "anti-speculation" are just as keenly interested in actual accident analysis, they merely want to do so with established facts as opposed to creating fictional scenarios. If we want a solid discussion, at the very least we need to have some actual information other than an agenda.

So far, we know that Wes was alone when he died....tragic in and of itself....but whether that played an important role in his death will only be determined once additional facts are presented. At present, we on this board have no such factual information, (nor do those on the other boards, either). So far, I have seen posts elsewhere that said that he didn't die off West Palm, but off of Marathon down in the Keys, that he died while using a borrowed CCR that he had never trained on, that it used to be his CCR before he sold it and he subsequently borrowed it for this dive, and that he used an expired cartridge....all this from people that weren't there and don't really have a clue....

As I said, so far we know that he died while alone. What can we actually take from that? How about this: "sometimes diving alone can result in you being alone when you die"? We need additional information to determine what the actual impact of that solo dive was. With the high-profile of this tragedy, I fully expect more factual information to be forthcoming. I didn't know Wes well, but I had met him on a few occasions and we both shared space as staffers in the masthead of ADM. I believe that he would have been the first to want his tragic death to benefit other divers, and that he would want the facts presented so that it could happen.

As we await those facts, please take some time to peruse Wes' work on the web and in his films in an effort to celebrate his accomplishments in life.

FWIW, I'm not a promoting solo diving on a rebreather, and I most certainly would never suggest that diving a CCR without adequate bail-out is a good idea.

- John

[Grateful Diver]

Since most of y'all don't read ScubaBoard, I'm going to repost something I wrote over there earlier today ... in response to the exact same issue being raised. Perhaps it'll better explain my feelings on this topic.

I might die alone while diving. If I do, I want it to be because I knew and accepted the risks of diving alone. I want that control over my life, and the activities I pursue in life. I do not care if others want to analyze and judge whether or not I should have made that decision ... it is ME who has to live this life in this body ... not them. I'll take responsibility for the consequences of my decisions ... and I reserve the right to be responsible for them.

I have to believe that someone like Wes Skiles knew the risks, had carefully weighed them against the benefits of diving alone, and had made an informed decision. As an adult, and a diver with vast experience to draw on, I think he would want his family and friends to respect his right to make that choice.

It's always easy to play "if only" games when something bad happens to someone ... whether it's someone you care about or someone you don't even know. And it's human nature to want to be protective of those you love, and encourage them to not take the risks that sometimes lead them to their death. But yanno what? For a lot of people, it's not how you die that matters ... it's how you live. I don't know a thing about Wes Skiles ... but given his accomplishments, I have to believe he was a man who cherished his choices in life, and who used them to live his life to the fullest degree. Maybe this will sound a bit ghoulish to those who are inherently risk-averse ... but I think he died well.

Watching my mother slowly fade from life in a hospital bed over the past several months, all I can say is "please God, don't let me go like that" ... I'd way rather go out like Wes did ... even if it takes a couple of decades off the amount of time I have on this earth.

The choices we make in life determine the quality of our experiences. For those of us who make choices such as solo diving, our loved ones are simply going to have to understand ... and respect ... our right to make them. If it leads to a premature death ... well ... we went out on our own terms ... and, speaking strictly for myself, that's exactly how I want it to be.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[derek b]

This is Very sad news.
Its not uncommon for photographers at high calibers to "push limits" I've done it a couple times when trying to meet a request for a magazine ( and thats no where near the caliber of Nat Geo)

[lamont]

If we don't find some kind of compromise between the anti-speculation and the accident-analysis crowd, we're heading down the path of not only not learning anything new from fatalities, but throwing away everything that we've learned.

With all due respect, I believe that by creating those two classifications you are doing both "groups" a disservice. I believe that those you wish to label as "anti-speculation" are just as keenly interested in actual accident analysis, they merely want to do so with established facts as opposed to creating fictional scenarios. If we want a solid discussion, at the very least we need to have some actual information other than an agenda.

So far, we know that Wes was alone when he died....tragic in and of itself....but whether that played an important role in his death will only be determined once additional facts are presented. At present, we on this board have no such factual information, (nor do those on the other boards, either). So far, I have seen posts elsewhere that said that he didn't die off West Palm, but off of Marathon down in the Keys, that he died while using a borrowed CCR that he had never trained on, that it used to be his CCR before he sold it and he subsequently borrowed it for this dive, and that he used an expired cartridge....all this from people that weren't there and don't really have a clue....

As I said, so far we know that he died while alone. What can we actually take from that? How about this: "sometimes diving alone can result in you being alone when you die"? We need additional information to determine what the actual impact of that solo dive was. With the high-profile of this tragedy, I fully expect more factual information to be forthcoming. I didn't know Wes well, but I had met him on a few occasions and we both shared space as staffers in the masthead of ADM. I believe that he would have been the first to want his tragic death to benefit other divers, and that he would want the facts presented so that it could happen.

As we await those facts, please take some time to peruse Wes' work on the web and in his films in an effort to celebrate his accomplishments in life.

FWIW, I'm not a promoting solo diving on a rebreather, and I most certainly would never suggest that diving a CCR without adequate bail-out is a good idea.

- John

And you are doing me a disservice from lumping me in with everyone talking about borrowed CCRs and reused cartridges, i never brought that up, but you dragged that into the discussion here.

I am focusing on the one fact which is as solid as we get in these discussions, which is that he left his buddies and ascended alone and the accident occurred due to the combination of CCR+ascent+solo. There's a track record of these kinds of accidents in experienced divers and we never seem to get good information out of the accident analysis.

I might be wrong, and there might be good information that comes out, but if we do get hard facts they're probably going to be less charitable to him since the next leading cause of CCR deaths is maintenance issues, so I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I'm with you that I'd rather wait for solid information about the state of the unit.

But what I wrote was a response to the one hard fact that we do actually have. And not having any else around meant that his fate was pretty well sealed once he went unconscious, while having a buddy watching him ascent certainly wouldn't have hurt or made the situation any worse. Even if it turns out it was a CVA (which we almost never get as definitive cause, only inferences from the presence of heart disease), on a no-deco dive there's a chance that a buddy could have gotten him to the surface and revived him.

[lamont]

Watching my mother slowly fade from life in a hospital bed over the past several months, all I can say is "please God, don't let me go like that" ... I'd way rather go out like Wes did ... even if it takes a couple of decades off the amount of time I have on this earth.

I've considered that if I ever notice signs of Alzheimer's or something like that in myself that I could just switch to cave diving solo and let nature take its course... I'm with you that I'd prefer to die in Nohoch than die going crazy in some hospital bed somewhere (not wanting to leave a body behind for the recovery team, though, is something that would probably stop me from really doing that).

So, I understand exactly where you're coming from. And I'm not really critical of Wes. He had a long career and was highly productive and left quite a legacy... I was flipping through an old Aquanauts from 1991 last night and found an article of his (also found a hilarious one with Gary Gentile about helium being completely pointless until you get below 250...).

Still, I don't see why we can't take this accident as a caution that even the most experienced of us can become complacent and get into trouble on one of the easiest dives. Why isn't it permissible to even bring that up? Would he really get that pissed off looking down from <pick-your-vision-of-the-after-life> at us drawing a conclusion that other divers should avoid making the same mistake?

[LCF]

Lamont, thank you. You are saying what I am thinking, and taking the heat for it.

[BDub]

Wes was a big boy, and knew the risks associated with diving a ccr, and solo diving a ccr w/o bailout, and he made a decision he was comfortable with. It may have been complacency. It may have been over-confidence. He may have had a much higher risk acceptance factor than most. Would he do the same over again if he was given the chance? Who knows?

Regardless, he paid the ultimate price for it, which is always tragic, but he knew the risks.

I'm all for objective, even heated, accident analysis discussions....when facts are disclosed. If it were me, I'd want others to feel free to discuss it and learn from my accident, mistakes, etc. However, until the facts do emerge, it's all speculation, and the "what ifs?" and "what abouts?" almost always deteriorate and spiral into divisive and often contentious debates over non-factual details. And that is something I wouldn't want.

If Wes' death gives someone who's been a bit complacent a wake up call (and that's ALL of us. It doesn't have to be someone solo diving a ccr w/o bailout), great. Good came from it.

But part of this is mindset as well. If someone is comfortable with the risks of solo diving with no bailout on a ccr, I don't see Wes' death changing anything. They read the sticker on the machine and made the choice. To them, Wes' death was unfortunate, but was part of the risks.

Regardless of whether a ccr is in my future or not, I can guarantee you that solo diving with no bailout is not. Because of this, I'm in no rush to draw my own conclusions or speculate, because it won't change anything for me or my diving. Instead, I'll wait patiently for the facts, enjoying the wonderful gifts he's given us in his work.

[John Rawlings]

Well said, Brian!

[Grateful Diver]

Wes was a big boy, and knew the risks associated with diving a ccr, and solo diving a ccr w/o bailout, and he made a decision he was comfortable with. It may have been complacency. It may have been over-confidence. He may have had a much higher risk acceptance factor than most. Would he do the same over again if he was given the chance? Who knows?

Regardless, he paid the ultimate price for it, which is always tragic, but he knew the risks.

Pretty much where I'm coming from. I'm gonna push another thought here ... which is if he were not the sort who weighed these risks and made the decision that they were worth taking, we wouldn't today be sitting aroung talking about all that he accomplished ... because making those decisions is an inherent part of the legacy he left behind.

I'm reminded of a line from the song "Dear Mr. Fantasy" ... "Please don't be sad, if it was a straight life you had, we wouldn't have known you all these years".

Wes probably learned and discarded more knowledge about diving than almost everyone reading this thread will ever know.

I'm all for objective, even heated, accident analysis discussions....when facts are disclosed. If it were me, I'd want others to feel free to discuss it and learn from my accident, mistakes, etc. However, until the facts do emerge, it's all speculation, and the "what ifs?" and "what abouts?" almost always deteriorate and spiral into divisive and often contentious debates over non-factual details. And that is something I wouldn't want.

I've watched and participated in discussions like this ever since I started diving ... going all the way back to when Garrett Weinberg died at Mukilteo. And almost always they end up going the same place. Despite a professed interest in learning from the mistakes of others, what they really turn into is an attempt to reaffirm what someone already believes they know ... and no real learning has ever come from any of them.

If Wes' death gives someone who's been a bit complacent a wake up call (and that's ALL of us. It doesn't have to be someone solo diving a ccr w/o bailout), great. Good came from it.

Maybe the real discussion here SHOULD be about complacency ... and how easy and insidious it is to become complacent. It shouldn't be about solo diving ... because, in reality, Wes wasn't solo diving. He was in the water with two other dive buddies. For whatever reason he made a conscious decision to separate from them, however temporarily he intended that to be. Is that really any different than when one of us ... as a DM or instructor ... goes out to set a flag for our class? Is that a solo dive? Have we planned and prepared for it as such? Or is it simply a case of complacency spawned from a mindset of ... it's just 20 feet, and I'll only be gone for a couple of minutes?

Who among us has ever done something like that?

But part of this is mindset as well. If someone is comfortable with the risks of solo diving with no bailout on a ccr, I don't see Wes' death changing anything. They read the sticker on the machine and made the choice. To them, Wes' death was unfortunate, but was part of the risks.

I gotta believe that Wes Skiles knew more about rebreathers ... how they worked, what the risks were ... than anybody reading this thread or making comments about what he should or shouldn't have been doing.

Regardless of whether a ccr is in my future or not, I can guarantee you that solo diving with no bailout is not. Because of this, I'm in no rush to draw my own conclusions or speculate, because it won't change anything for me or my diving. Instead, I'll wait patiently for the facts, enjoying the wonderful gifts he given us in his work.

Exactly ... thank you ... not a single person reading this thread will ... realistically ... change a thing about their diving because of this death ... no matter what "facts" come out or get debated. We will only change based on our own personal experiences.

I would prefer, by far, to see us celebrate the life he lived ... knowing that every day we all take risks that could kill us. In the end which would you rather have people saying about you ... that you lived well, or that you died poorly ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Grateful Diver]

Still, I don't see why we can't take this accident as a caution that even the most experienced of us can become complacent and get into trouble on one of the easiest dives. Why isn't it permissible to even bring that up? Would he really get that pissed off looking down from <pick-your-vision-of-the-after-life> at us drawing a conclusion that other divers should avoid making the same mistake?

For what it's worth, I agree with you. But this isn't where the conversation was heading. Once it went down the road of how dangerous rebreathers are, and why people shouldn't be solo diving, the complacency train left this track completely.

Will divers avoid making mistakes because someone else died making them? I don't think so. Divers are just people ... they draw their own conclusions, and make their own decisions, regardless of any lessons learned or taught. Look at the recent death at Peacock, and how many divers out there who KNEW better and were TAUGHT better still think there's nothing wrong with making visual jumps? No agency supports that practice. Every diver who's ever taken a cave class knows it's wrong. And yet it's still a common practice.

Why is that?

Ultimately I think it's because people believe what they want to believe. And the "it won't happen to me" mentality bites us all at some point or another. It's part of being human. Everybody makes mistakes. And although it's nice to think that we'll learn from someone else's mistakes, in the end I think it's rare that people do. Mostly, we rationalize what we want to believe, find ways to reaffirm why it won't happen to us, and do exactly what we decide we want to. Sometimes we learn from making our own mistakes ... if we survive ... but it's rare to learn from the mistakes of others. Particularly when those mistakes don't simply reinforce what we already want to believe.

That's just how people are. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt ... and the ability to rationalize is something we are all born with. Ultimately we all learn what we choose to, when we choose to, and how we choose to ... and I've yet to see that happen, in practice, because of mistakes that someone else made ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[lundysd]

Right now I'm not dwelling on the events that surround his death. Instead I'm waking up every morning, turning on my computer, and flipping over to Wes' website. Every morning I find another hidden gem among his collection of photos, and that makes my day just a little bit brighter.

Guys if I kick the bucket diving, feel free to judge my actions and repeat ad nauseum what I did wrong, especially if it truly stops another from doing the same thing. But at the same time.... I hope that just a few of you would instead realize that I love what I do, and instead focus your thoughts on the good times many of us have had in the water together, or on that one decent photo somewhere along the road that I took

[lamont]

Still, I don't see why we can't take this accident as a caution that even the most experienced of us can become complacent and get into trouble on one of the easiest dives. Why isn't it permissible to even bring that up? Would he really get that pissed off looking down from <pick-your-vision-of-the-after-life> at us drawing a conclusion that other divers should avoid making the same mistake?

For what it's worth, I agree with you. But this isn't where the conversation was heading. Once it went down the road of how dangerous rebreathers are, and why people shouldn't be solo diving, the complacency train left this track completely.

Will divers avoid making mistakes because someone else died making them? I don't think so. Divers are just people ... they draw their own conclusions, and make their own decisions, regardless of any lessons learned or taught. Look at the recent death at Peacock, and how many divers out there who KNEW better and were TAUGHT better still think there's nothing wrong with making visual jumps? No agency supports that practice. Every diver who's ever taken a cave class knows it's wrong. And yet it's still a common practice.

Why is that?

Ultimately I think it's because people believe what they want to believe. And the "it won't happen to me" mentality bites us all at some point or another. It's part of being human. Everybody makes mistakes. And although it's nice to think that we'll learn from someone else's mistakes, in the end I think it's rare that people do. Mostly, we rationalize what we want to believe, find ways to reaffirm why it won't happen to us, and do exactly what we decide we want to. Sometimes we learn from making our own mistakes ... if we survive ... but it's rare to learn from the mistakes of others. Particularly when those mistakes don't simply reinforce what we already want to believe.

That's just how people are. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt ... and the ability to rationalize is something we are all born with. Ultimately we all learn what we choose to, when we choose to, and how we choose to ... and I've yet to see that happen, in practice, because of mistakes that someone else made ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

To make another political (eeek) analogy, you have to consider the 'undecided voters' in this situation. The people who always follow the rules will always follow the rules, the people who take visual jumps and break thirds because the rules don't apply to them will continue to do. Its all the divers in the middle ground that you have to consider, which are the divers who might make that one exception to the rules on one occasion, because its a simple dive to 70 feet and what could go wrong? I don't think its useless to discuss something like this. If one 30 year old kid goes "damn Wes Skiles died on a 70 ft dive on a rebreather ascending alone, I better get my buddy to come up with me" and then lives through a situation that might have otherwise killed him (and that's an event we aren't likely to know about and can't measure) then I think the discussion will have been well-spent. The problem is that there's no way to measure how often these kinds of discussions lead to averting some kind of situation like that, so I'd prefer to err on the side of discussing these things.