My use of the PM system was to calm not inflame.
I apologise for any upset caused either here or on PM. It was never my intention to cause hurt but I will defend myself. I was happy to walk away some time ago and now will without further comment.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Eltigre
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 95
0 miles · West Yorkshire
Forum
Quote by jaymar
So, my honesty is in question again.....I have terminated my membership here but it looks like I will still be a member until my month is up.
I invite a moderator into this situation. To review the thread, consider my posts and confirm that the PM sent to Jaymar below is the complete and was not intended to add fuel to the flames.
jaymar
why do you find it hard to believe that I am an honest new member? Just because in a short time I have reached this conclusion and have voiced my opinion shouldn't be a reason for yet more suspicion. Does it make it easier for you to believe that I am a troll or previous member or is it indicative of the current climate? You were wrong about what I said about cleanliness and you are wrong now and to be honest none of us likes to be told what we are thinking. The reason for me going is that I do not like to be seen to be causing trouble, I don‘t enjoy conflict.
Stick by your mate. I might even do the same if the situation were reversed but if I was being honest I would have to acknowledge that seems to enjoy an established controlling position here. I am a decent bloke and might have got on well with some of the members if given a chance to get past the inquisition but life’s too short.
I don't consider it to be nasty and feel that you edited it to suit your purposes.
If you had read my posts you would have noticed that I did reply to you about cleanliness with yet another explanation!
Eltigre
I just adapted it to save your embarassment, it's your right to post the whole thing if you want to - it's ok I've saved the original for verification if need be.
That is the original!
I would like a mod to confirm this to be the one and only original PM I sent to jaymar, please!
So, my honesty is in question again.....I have terminated my membership here but it looks like I will still be a member until my month is up.
I invite a moderator into this situation. To review the thread, consider my posts and confirm that the PM sent to Jaymar below is the complete and was not intended to add fuel to the flames.
jaymar
why do you find it hard to believe that I am an honest new member? Just because in a short time I have reached this conclusion and have voiced my opinion shouldn't be a reason for yet more suspicion. Does it make it easier for you to believe that I am a troll or previous member or is it indicative of the current climate? You were wrong about what I said about cleanliness and you are wrong now and to be honest none of us likes to be told what we are thinking. The reason for me going is that I do not like to be seen to be causing trouble, I don‘t enjoy conflict.
Stick by your mate. I might even do the same if the situation were reversed but if I was being honest I would have to acknowledge that seems to enjoy an established controlling position here. I am a decent bloke and might have got on well with some of the members if given a chance to get past the inquisition but life’s too short.
This was the one and only PM I have sent you. Who is the liar? I don't consider it to be nasty and feel that you edited it to suit your purposes.
If you had read my posts you would have noticed that I did reply to you about cleanliness with yet another explanation!
Eltigre
I invite a moderator into this situation. To review the thread, consider my posts and confirm that the PM sent to Jaymar below is the complete and was not intended to add fuel to the flames.
jaymar
why do you find it hard to believe that I am an honest new member? Just because in a short time I have reached this conclusion and have voiced my opinion shouldn't be a reason for yet more suspicion. Does it make it easier for you to believe that I am a troll or previous member or is it indicative of the current climate? You were wrong about what I said about cleanliness and you are wrong now and to be honest none of us likes to be told what we are thinking. The reason for me going is that I do not like to be seen to be causing trouble, I don‘t enjoy conflict.
Stick by your mate. I might even do the same if the situation were reversed but if I was being honest I would have to acknowledge that seems to enjoy an established controlling position here. I am a decent bloke and might have got on well with some of the members if given a chance to get past the inquisition but life’s too short.
This was the one and only PM I have sent you. Who is the liar? I don't consider it to be nasty and feel that you edited it to suit your purposes.
If you had read my posts you would have noticed that I did reply to you about cleanliness with yet another explanation!
Eltigre
Quote by niceguysdoexist
FB was in fact batting on your side mate .
Of course she was
at what point exactly.I didn't intend to continue this thread and probably shouldn't as I know that it will do little if any good. It is intended to clarify my feelings and not cause trouble. Though I have cancelled my account here I feel that I should reply.
I have spent some time reading many threads before making this post and as a result feel that some long established members, maybe because of their strong position, personality or posting style regularly exhibit less than constructive tendencies. Looking at posts, dissecting them, asking for clarification then trying to find confrontation from another angle doesn't put people at ease. Some have a following of friends who give their support which I understand and applaud. What I don't like is how they appear to change the direction when the "leader" does.
A full arsenal of sarcastic comments, innuendo, double edged statements poorly disguised as humour and little snide digs are used to great effect. This is tantamount to bullying.
If a mod gives me the "benefit of the doubt" I accept that but without that authority it is not up to anyone else here to do that. I have never been involved with any other forum where an individual or group has taken it upon themselves to question every ambiguity with such vigour. I am pleased to see that I am not alone in this assessment and thank those who have been strong enough to voice their opinions and others who have spoken to me in private.
I wish you all well for the future. Goodbye
Thank you for allowing me the benefit of the doubt. 
OK enough is enough.....I can't keep this up. I apologise to those here who know me for behaving this way. I’d prefer to be direct unlike others who post veiled comments intended to provoke or belittle.
As a new member I was surprised at the number of times self appointed guardians of the forum took it upon themselves to monitor posts where there is a chance of a confrontation. Anything that could be regarded as worth a verbal punch up is generally highlighted immediately.
Previous posts are investigated and questions posed to the offending poster. I know that I am not the only person that feels that there is a system in place that does not positively encourage new members. I know that precautions have to be taken but I feel a balance should be reached, you can be too defensive.
I have only been here a very short time and in fairness didn't understand the swinging scene or the people involved in it. I have learned enough to know that I will not find what I am looking for here though appreciate the pleasure that this community offers some.
So, I’ll get me coat. Do not condemn the judgement of others because it differs from your own. You might both be wrong.
Eltigre
OK enough is enough.....I can't keep this up. I apologise to those here who know me for behaving this way. I’d prefer to be direct unlike others who post veiled comments intended to provoke or belittle.
As a new member I was surprised at the number of times self appointed guardians of the forum took it upon themselves to monitor posts where there is a chance of a confrontation. Anything that could be regarded as worth a verbal punch up is generally highlighted immediately.
Previous posts are investigated and questions posed to the offending poster. I know that I am not the only person that feels that there is a system in place that does not positively encourage new members. I know that precautions have to be taken but I feel a balance should be reached, you can be too defensive.
I have only been here a very short time and in fairness didn't understand the swinging scene or the people involved in it. I have learned enough to know that I will not find what I am looking for here though appreciate the pleasure that this community offers some.
So, I’ll get me coat. Do not condemn the judgement of others because it differs from your own. You might both be wrong.
Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird
Joking apart, posts that can be interpreted negatively frequently are. It is easy to find fault if you look for it.
It's also easy to find fault when posts aren't clear enough, or could be interpreted in different ways. You don't have to be looking for it.
You said yourself, 'But, that is only my interpretation of his post' - were you looking to interpret it in a particular way? I doubt it.
I told you how I interpreted his post. You said that you doubt that I did. That makes me think that you are calling me a liar and I feel that I won't be alone in thinking that.
Eltigre
The other way of looking at it, is to say that you intended to interpret his post how you wanted to. That would be bad.
Everyone interprets everything they read in their own way.
Now you are suggesting that my interpretation could have been reached to suit the way this thread was going. That isn't the way I do things.
Eltigre
Quote by louise_and_joe
From day one, which wasn't long ago, I have tried to be honest in my dealings with everyone here. Your doubts are unfounded and I am not too keen on being called a liar.
Eltigre
From what I can see, freckledbird has not called you a liar. She has simply asked you questions so that you could clarify what you meant.
Im sure that you will agree that your opinions seem to change from one post to the next. Whether its because you are just writing them down wrong or not, who knows.
Dont take things so personally ( yeah right, I can talk
)No harm or malice is meant :thumbup: Louise xx
Louise
How else would you interpet this "were you looking to interpret it in a particular way? I doubt it"
My opinions have stayed constant. Though I have not presented them well and have made poor use of a quote I think that most people will understand me.
I don't generally take things personally until they become personal
and the comment above was.Regards, Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird
Joking apart, posts that can be interpreted negatively frequently are. It is easy to find fault if you look for it.
It's also easy to find fault when posts aren't clear enough, or could be interpreted in different ways. You don't have to be looking for it.
You said yourself, 'But, that is only my interpretation of his post' - were you looking to interpret it in a particular way? I doubt it.
I told you how I interpreted his post. You said that you doubt that I did. That makes me think that you are calling me a liar and I feel that I won't be alone in thinking that.
Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird
Joking apart, posts that can be interpreted negatively frequently are. It is easy to find fault if you look for it.
It's also easy to find fault when posts aren't clear enough, or could be interpreted in different ways. You don't have to be looking for it.
You said yourself, 'But, that is only my interpretation of his post' - were you looking to interpret it in a particular way? I doubt it.
I agree that my original post wasn't clear but I tried to clear that up when I saw how it could be interpreted.
Of course I interepreted SuperDaves post in my way as you do with everything you read. What makes your interpretation right and mine wrong? I stand by my statement.
From day one, which wasn't long ago, I have tried to be honest in my dealings with everyone here. Your doubts are unfounded and I am not too keen on being called a liar.Eltigre
Quote by SuperDave
Must agree with Freckles.
Personally I would walk away if I did not like the look of someone, or sometimes more importantly, if there was a serious personality clash? Obviously you would try to be nice and "flower it up" a bit, (theres no need to be nasty) but I would guess that a polite "no" would be in order?
I am going to have to be more careful when using quotes.
I apologise for any confusion. I don't think that SuperDave meant that he would simply turn tail and make a bolt for the door. In reading his next sentence I assumed that he might at least engage in some conversation at which point he would see what they were like. But, that is only my interpretation of his post. 
ops: I was agreeing with the "or sometimes more importantly, if there was a serious personality clash?" part.
In future I will take much more care when posting as I am a sensitive lad (my mates at the "potting pansies for winter cheer forum" tell me so) and I don't like to be the cause any confusion or upset .
Joking apart, posts that can be interpreted negatively frequently are. It is easy to find fault if you look for it.
Regards, Eltigre
Quote by jaymar
The only reason we would not meet up with a couple again would be personality clashes. There has never been an issue for us with looks or how people dress etc. The only other factor would be that as we are extremely clean people, hygiene is a high priority to us and we expect the same back.
We take our time getting to know people anyway via cam, texts, pics etc., so the formalities there are out the way. On a meet, we've fortunately always got on with the couple but should it happen that we didn't all click, honesty is the best policy I'm afraid and certainly not a few more drinks and "get on with it".
Thanks for the comments
Hygiene is very important and something that you will not know about until you get together. That is something that has to be spot on, for me if it wasn't I could not continue with a meeting.
I had not taken into account getting to know people before getting together so that would prepare you pretty well.
Eltigre
I disagree slightly, you are talking about personal genital hygiene, which of course you won't know until you get intimate. I'm talking in relation to visual hygiene also, that can be nice clean skin, nails, teeth, well groomed clean clothes.. etc.,
What goes on on the top follows through to the underneath
Nope, sorry again.
I wasn't talking about genital hygiene (though that is important). Photos can be changed or old. You can't tell what a person smells like until you are close to them.Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird
Personally I would walk away if I did not like the look of someone, or sometimes more importantly, if there was a serious personality clash? Obviously you would try to be nice and "flower it up" a bit, (theres no need to be nasty) but I would guess that a polite "no" would be in order?
I feel the same way. It would be important for me to be honest but not hurtful. Looks are important to me but are less so where someone has a great character.
Cheers, Eltigre
But if you waled away because you didn't like the look of someone, how would you know if they had a great character?
I'm not doing very well today
I didn't say I would walk away. I like to think that in most circumstances I would give the person a chance. I am not implying that I am anything special I should say instead of "the person" the relationship a chance. That is not to imply that I am looking for a relationship as such.....and by saying that I hope that no one gets the idea that I'm a thoughtless swine who is just interested in sex. Right then I am starting to feel like I'm walking on eggshells so I'll have a brew.
Or......are you talking about Daves post?
Cheers, Eltigre
Quote by jaymar
The only reason we would not meet up with a couple again would be personality clashes. There has never been an issue for us with looks or how people dress etc. The only other factor would be that as we are extremely clean people, hygiene is a high priority to us and we expect the same back.
We take our time getting to know people anyway via cam, texts, pics etc., so the formalities there are out the way. On a meet, we've fortunately always got on with the couple but should it happen that we didn't all click, honesty is the best policy I'm afraid and certainly not a few more drinks and "get on with it".
Thanks for the comments
Hygiene is very important and something that you will not know about until you get together. That is something that has to be spot on, for me if it wasn't I could not continue with a meeting.
I had not taken into account getting to know people before getting together so that would prepare you pretty well.
Eltigre
Quote by SuperDave
Personally I would walk away if I did not like the look of someone, or sometimes more importantly, if there was a serious personality clash? Obviously you would try to be nice and "flower it up" a bit, (theres no need to be nasty) but I would guess that a polite "no" would be in order?
I feel the same way. It would be important for me to be honest but not hurtful. Looks are important to me but are less so where someone has a great character.
Cheers, Eltigre
Freckledbird
Thanks for the great explanation. I appreciate that different people will have different ways of conducting their meetings.
I know that written communication is very easy to misinterpret, especially when I am writing it. That is why I added the PS to my last post. When I talk about compromising I followed up by mentioning first impressions which is initially what we all react to. The question probably should have been…..Though the people you meet don’t really come up to your normal standards, do you ignore your first impressions at a meeting, have a few drinks, give it a chance and see what the people are really like?
I’ve read through it a few times and I think that I have it right now.
Eltigre
Thanks for the great explanation. I appreciate that different people will have different ways of conducting their meetings.
I know that written communication is very easy to misinterpret, especially when I am writing it. That is why I added the PS to my last post. When I talk about compromising I followed up by mentioning first impressions which is initially what we all react to. The question probably should have been…..Though the people you meet don’t really come up to your normal standards, do you ignore your first impressions at a meeting, have a few drinks, give it a chance and see what the people are really like?
I’ve read through it a few times and I think that I have it right now.
Eltigre
Having read through a good number of posts I understand the way that the majority people prefer to "do business". There is a well established protocol which makes sense.
I was wondering if for the sake of a good night sometimes people compromised at all. Good relationship can develop after negative first impressions.
Eltigre
PS. By "good night" I don't mean having sex.
I was wondering if for the sake of a good night sometimes people compromised at all. Good relationship can develop after negative first impressions.
Eltigre
PS. By "good night" I don't mean having sex.
Quote by Freckledbird
What do you mean by 'after a drink or two did you throw caution to the wind and get on with it.'?
Not phrased as well as it should have been.
I meant forget that things aren't quite as good as you would like them to be and not make a decission until you have had a chance to get to know the people better.
Eltigre
Hello
Everyone involved here must have certain standards that they try to adhere to. These might include how a person looks, how the dress, how they conduct themselves and even how they speak. Some members, as part of their adverts and profiles state that they are not interested in people who are, for example, fat. We all know what type of people we are turned on by and would like to meet in an ideal world and that is fine.
My question is, how many of you have found yourself in a situation where you meet people who fall bellow your expectations. What did you do in that situation. Did you walk away after politely explaining that you weren’t compatible or after a drink or two did you throw caution to the wind and get on with it.
Regards, Eltigre
Everyone involved here must have certain standards that they try to adhere to. These might include how a person looks, how the dress, how they conduct themselves and even how they speak. Some members, as part of their adverts and profiles state that they are not interested in people who are, for example, fat. We all know what type of people we are turned on by and would like to meet in an ideal world and that is fine.
My question is, how many of you have found yourself in a situation where you meet people who fall bellow your expectations. What did you do in that situation. Did you walk away after politely explaining that you weren’t compatible or after a drink or two did you throw caution to the wind and get on with it.
Regards, Eltigre
From the perspective of a newbie it looks as though married/single men have a bit of a problem here.
When I worked as a lad for British Rail as an assistant train driver, the driver use to ask two questions when you climbed onto the engine......have you made a brew and have you driven over this route before? If you had brewed up you were half way there
but they would not let you take control of the engine if you said you hadn't driven over that particular route before. :cry:
You might know the route like the back of your hand (and all of the temporary restrictions) so what do you do, lie and tell him you had driven over the route or resign yourself to the fact that until some driver gave you a chance you would have to watch from the second mans chair.
At the end of the day there has to be some trust involved or no progress is made. I understand that there will be some people here, men, women, singles and couples who are not who they would like others to think they are. For this reason precautions should be taken but in the same respect there are genuine, decent, honest members (who can make a bloody good brew)who might find it difficult to get involved because of the system of being recommended/vouched for. I have been advised by a lovely lady (many thanks xx) that I should get myself noticed by posting on the forum more and joining in in the chat room. I appreciate her advice but how can anyone here tell if one person or the next is telling the truth, or is a reputation here based on volume of your posts?
This post is not intended to rock the boat , I am simply trying to better understand the people here.
Regards, Eltigre
When I worked as a lad for British Rail as an assistant train driver, the driver use to ask two questions when you climbed onto the engine......have you made a brew and have you driven over this route before? If you had brewed up you were half way there
but they would not let you take control of the engine if you said you hadn't driven over that particular route before. :cry:You might know the route like the back of your hand (and all of the temporary restrictions) so what do you do, lie and tell him you had driven over the route or resign yourself to the fact that until some driver gave you a chance you would have to watch from the second mans chair.
At the end of the day there has to be some trust involved or no progress is made. I understand that there will be some people here, men, women, singles and couples who are not who they would like others to think they are. For this reason precautions should be taken but in the same respect there are genuine, decent, honest members (who can make a bloody good brew)who might find it difficult to get involved because of the system of being recommended/vouched for. I have been advised by a lovely lady (many thanks xx) that I should get myself noticed by posting on the forum more and joining in in the chat room. I appreciate her advice but how can anyone here tell if one person or the next is telling the truth, or is a reputation here based on volume of your posts?
This post is not intended to rock the boat , I am simply trying to better understand the people here.
Regards, Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird
If you look back at my posts I made a point of saying that blame should not be apportioned. I am not questioning how anyone behaved other than saying that IMHO it is better to try resuscitate in this situation than to do nothing. Nor have I ever mentioned whether they should or should not have jumped in that was their choice.
I don’t consider myself to be special but I do know what I would have done in that situation.
Eltigre
I know you weren't trying to apportion blame - others were though. I didn't mean to imply that you had, sorry.
To go back to the original situation - it wasn't actually about resuscitation, it was about jumping into a pond (with who knows what, unseen under the surface). The OP said they'd have jumped in and condemned the PCSOs for not doing that.
You might have experience and/or training for this kind of situation - I'm a first aider so have had some training. I still don't know how I would react, given that situation though. Too many variables and factors to take into consideration for the majority of people (especially untrained) to say how they would have reacted. Only in my opinion, of course.
No apology needed.
It's good to talk. I understand that there is a vast difference between the way people with and without training react.Eltigre
Quote by bbw_lover
I think the saying goes soemthing like "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
Indeed.
There is the possibility that more damage can be done by people who think they can do first aid.
In this situation, which is what I was talking about when I said you couldn't make matters any worse, any attempt to get the child breathing and his heart beating would be better than doing nothing. Where CPR is concerned a little knowledge is sometimes all that is needed to save a life or preserve it until professionals can arrive.
Eltigre
How can that be when the protocols for performing CPR change almost weekly
Protocols certainly do change frequently but no matter how many breaths/compression is the advised current method.......if someone is not breathing and their heart is not pumping any attempt to change that situation in this case where no professional help was available is a good thing.
You surely aren't saying that if someone doesn't know exactly what the current CPR protocol is they should do nothing? If someone were to give me 26 compressions instead of 30 and 3 breaths instead of two and I recovered you wouldn’t hear me complaining.
Eltigre
Well all the paramedics and doctors I work with at weekends reckon CPR done badly is a dangerous thing :dunno:
What? :shock: Dangerous to someone who is effectively dead!
Eltigre
I don't understand this arguement.
Context is everything and if something is more likely to make things worse I cannot see the logic in carrying on regardless.
In this situation, the point I am trying to make, none too well, is that if a person is not breathing and their heart is not beating. No professional help is likely to get there in time. They are not going to live. Trying to give CPR is their only hope. You might not do it as to the current prescribed instructions but......if you are able to get their heart started and they start breathing they might just live.
If in the process you manage to break a rib, tear intercostal muscles or fracture the sternum (in the case of very young or old people)if they live they are unlikely to complain. If they do not resuscitate what is the difference, at least you tried.
Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird
With respect it is this situation that I am talking about.
Conditioned response is the whole idea of training be it in the armed forces, the police force or fire service. With training your actions become more automatic and therefore predictable and though circumstances may and do change you are able to predict fairly well how you will respond. This is especially true when you are dealing with similar situations on a regular basis.
I agree, it is difficult for people who have not been trained or experienced situations like this to accurately predict how they would react.
Eltigre
And with respect, the officers were said to have not had appropriate training - so for this situation, their response should not be condemned or questioned, by people who do not have all the facts.
We can all sit here quite comfortably and say we would jump in, but the fact still remains that you cannot say for certain how you would react until you're there.
If you look back at my posts I made a point of saying that blame should not be apportioned. I am not questioning how anyone behaved other than saying that IMHO it is better to try resuscitate in this situation than to do nothing. Nor have I ever mentioned whether they should or should not have jumped in that was their choice.
I don’t consider myself to be special but I do know what I would have done in that situation.
Eltigre
Quote by Dawnie
I'm trained in CPR, I'm trained to use a DeFib machine and was on call in our local area a while back. I was fairly confident in what I knew, been over it a dozen of times. I'd coped with emergencies in the family home more than once so I was more than happy with any situation that I would be thrown into.
The only time the phone went and I had to go and assist an incident, I almost shit my pants
I couldn't remember where the road was and considering Ian had live in it years before, my mind had stupidly gone blank.
Took me a minute to gather my thoughts and even then, Ian drove me.
Gladly I wasn't needed in the end but it just goes to show, we have no way of knowing how we will behave in any given situation.
The first time is always the worst. There will always be nerves but it gets easier.
Eltigre
Quote by Mallock2006
I think the saying goes soemthing like "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
Indeed.
There is the possibility that more damage can be done by people who think they can do first aid.
In this situation, which is what I was talking about when I said you couldn't make matters any worse, any attempt to get the child breathing and his heart beating would be better than doing nothing. Where CPR is concerned a little knowledge is sometimes all that is needed to save a life or preserve it until professionals can arrive.
Eltigre
How can that be when the protocols for performing CPR change almost weekly
Protocols certainly do change frequently but no matter how many breaths/compression is the advised current method.......if someone is not breathing and their heart is not pumping any attempt to change that situation in this case where no professional help was available is a good thing.
You surely aren't saying that if someone doesn't know exactly what the current CPR protocol is they should do nothing? If someone were to give me 26 compressions instead of 30 and 3 breaths instead of two and I recovered you wouldn’t hear me complaining.
Eltigre
Well all the paramedics and doctors I work with at weekends reckon CPR done badly is a dangerous thing :dunno:
What? :shock: Dangerous to someone who is effectively dead!
Eltigre
Quote by Freckledbird......
It's still hypothetical - none of us knows absolutely what we'd do until we are in that situation.
.....or have dealt with situations like it before.
Eltigre
Every situation is different - you can't possibly predict exactly what you'd do. If you're untrained, you're even less likely to say what you'd do in any given circumstance.
With respect it is this situation that I am talking about.
Conditioned response is the whole idea of training be it in the armed forces, the police force or fire service. With training your actions become more automatic and therefore predictable and though circumstances may and do change you are able to predict fairly well how you will respond. This is especially true when you are dealing with similar situations on a regular basis.
I agree, it is difficult for people who have not been trained or experienced situations like this to accurately predict how they would react.
Eltigre
Quote by Mallock2006
I think the saying goes soemthing like "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
Indeed.
There is the possibility that more damage can be done by people who think they can do first aid.
In this situation, which is what I was talking about when I said you couldn't make matters any worse, any attempt to get the child breathing and his heart beating would be better than doing nothing. Where CPR is concerned a little knowledge is sometimes all that is needed to save a life or preserve it until professionals can arrive.
Eltigre
How can that be when the protocols for performing CPR change almost weekly
Protocols certainly do change frequently but no matter how many breaths/compression is the advised current method.......if someone is not breathing and their heart is not pumping any attempt to change that situation in this case where no professional help was available is a good thing.
You surely aren't saying that if someone doesn't know exactly what the current CPR protocol is they should do nothing? If someone were to give me 26 compressions instead of 30 and 3 breaths instead of two and I recovered you wouldn’t hear me complaining.
Eltigre
