CDG Online Incident Reporting System Validation Policy

Online Incident Reports will be subject to the CDG Web Message Board Editorial Policy.

1. Reports will be subject to a validation process prior to being accepted for public viewing. The reports may be edited or rejected completely.
2. Information that will allow a public reader to identify individuals will be edited from the public report unless the information is both a) relevant to the lessons learned from the incident and b) provided with the consent of the individuals concerned.
3. Poor spelling or grammar will be accepted in its original form unless the meaning of the text becomes unclear. The editor can either directly amend the text or contact the originator for clarification.
4. Information that is extraneous to the incident or the lessons learned will be accepted on the condition that the extraneous text does not undermine the value of reporting the incident or the value of the system as a whole.
5. Where no Contributory Factors are assigned, none will be added by the editor even if the Factors are clearly apparent from the text.
6. Where Contributory Factors have been assigned and they are clearly incorrect given the information contained within the text, then the editor may amend the Factor to “Unknown”.
7. If an editor receives additional information about an incident from another source then the editor may amend the report in any manner including amending the Contributory Factors.
8. Titles can be amended to avoid confusion with other reports.
9. Reports will be assessed for authenticity. If the moderator suspects that the report is not entirely genuine then the report may be edited or rejected.
10. Reports will be assessed for their educational value. If there are few or incorrect lessons to be learned then the report may be edited or rejected.
11. If a complaint is made about a report then the report should be withdrawn from public view until the issue is resolved.
12. Reports will be assessed for their impact on access agreements. Where a concern is raised then the report may be edited or rejected.
13. Reports will be assessed for their relevance to cave diving conditions commonly faced by the CDG membership. Where report or lessons learned may be relevant only to a contradictory style of diving such as open water buddy diving then the report may be edited or rejected.
14. Information contained in the extended reporting section cannot be made public in any way that would identify an individual.
15. The information contained within the incident reporting system can be made available to any elected officer of the Group.
16. Periodic summaries of the incidents and their common causal factors should be published by the Group and made public as an aid to the continuing education of all UK cave divers.
17. Reports will be assessed for their personal impact on people involved in cave diving. Where a social concern is raised then the report may be edited or rejected.