February banter thread

[mappy]

11 hours ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Business was booming at the graveyard a few weeks ago but now things have declined. I'll need to keep hovering around the remaining survivors. If I'm not reapin' I'm not eatin'. 

well, I hate to be the one to make you starve, but I don't see myself dying any time soon. Too many weenies to troll 

[mattie g]

1 hour ago, NorthArlington101 said:

I know we have this discussion every year but nothing frightens me more then seeing PDS tor soundings in this area. Nobody here is ready and it's so densely populated. Arlington is something like four miles wide and if the nightmare mile wide tor down 66 ever happened... 

Anyways I know it's all out of our control, and I'll probably spend some good time tracking this too. Best of luck to all. 

The chances of getting an F4/F5 tornado around the DC Beltway are minuscule. If it *were* to happen, it would be an almost unprecedented natural disaster in this country, but the likelihood is so incredibly remote that it's not worth worrying about.

I'm not interested in damage to health and home (or power outages), but I've always been fascinated by thunderstorms. I'm all about getting in on the action, but I have no desire to ever see a tornado in my backyard - no matter how puny it is.

[mattie g]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

I respect your opinion and I'm not entirely sure what specifically your taking issue with but we seem to get this general complaint every so often and I always find it a bit odd. What should we be doing in the "long range thread"?  If your referring to the fantasy land snow maps I threw up as a joke with the tag "let's just enjoy this for 6 hours" then my original comment that why not have some fun in this awful year. We haven't had many weenie runs even long range so what's wrong with enjoying one even if we know it's not real?  

Weather is serious bizniss.

[BTRWx]

7 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

I respect your opinion and I'm not entirely sure what specifically your taking issue with but we seem to get this general complaint every so often and I always find it a bit odd. What should we be doing in the "long range thread"?  If your referring to the fantasy land snow maps I threw up as a joke with the tag "let's just enjoy this for 6 hours" then my original comment that why not have some fun in this awful year. We haven't had many weenie runs even long range so what's wrong with enjoying one even if we know it's not real?  

I think a little more consensus in analyses is needed unlike others have said.  Consensus is a big factor in nwp is it not?  The March thread has been anything but consensus.  There's a difference between giving analyses on pattern development and describing what each op shows at range.  For good/great weenie runs, by all *means* embrace the weenieism!  But I'm sure you'd agree that every op run does not need such discussion at such long (not medium) range.

[BTRWx]

3 hours ago, showmethesnow said:

 

Not trying to get in an argument over this whatsoever so please don't take it that way. I just want to give you the perspective of those who were posting in the long range thread at the time of your initial posting. Now if you would have come out and said initially, 'We need to stop posting long range maps' then that would have probably been fine. It would have been your opinion, an opinion I don't don't agree with by the way, but an opinion none the less that had no insulting connotations. But your general statement of sending a red tagger in there to straighten things out strongly implied that the clueless weenies were running amok trashing the place, that they had no clue whatsoever when it came to the models. Which was quite insulting to those of us in the middle of the discussion. 

Again, no desire for an argument on my part just trying to give you our perspective.

Some of that is honestly true with my thoughts.  I challenge you to skim through last week's discussions and come back here to tell me they were mostly productive.  I'm not commenting there as much becuase of the lack of realism.  I do think some of the weenieism has been "trashing the place", but also believe most of us do understand nwp.  If you all want to discuss pattern signal fallacies, fine.  I just won't be part of it.

[BTRWx]

6 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Are you dead?  

? I think the pattern thread might be.

[mattie g]

24 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Some of that is honestly true with my thoughts.  I challenge you to skim through last week's discussions and come back here to tell me they were mostly productive.  I'm not commenting there as much becuase of the lack of realism.  I do think some of the weenieism has been "trashing the place", but also believe most of us do understand nwp.  If you all want to discuss pattern signal fallacies, fine.  I just won't be part of it.

This is a public weather forum for weather enthusiasts. You shouldn't expect there to be detailed technical discussion in every post, especially when a pattern is crap and there's not much else to discuss.

Folks have been here for ages, and there's nothing different about what they're doing now than what has been going on for years. If something looks interesting, people will post about it and will often dig into technical details. If things aren't interesting, folks will gab about it and throw out random thoughts on the look and what might/might not go right or wrong given the pattern.

You have every right not to take part in reasoned, adult(-ish) discussion. But I don't see the need to knock others for doing so...nor for asking a mighty "red tag" to put non-red-taggers in their place. That's insulting, to be honest.

[showmethesnow]

13 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Some of that is honestly true with my thoughts.  I challenge you to skim through last week's discussions and come back here to tell me they were mostly productive.  I'm not commenting there as much becuase of the lack of realism.  I do think some of the weenieism has been "trashing the place", but also believe most of us do understand nwp.  If you all want to discuss pattern signal fallacies, fine.  I just won't be part of it.

I am glad you edited this somewhat from your original post. As it was it sounded as if you felt that those in the Long range discussion thread should reach a consensus view on a solution and then stick with it allowing no dissenting views. Needless to say I found that a quite interesting idea considering that that basically takes out any discussion in what is supposed to be a discussion thread.

Now as far as productivity, are you referring to the lack of snow in regards to the discussion of the possibilities in the longer range? I guess if your bottom line is seeing ground truth, then yeah it wasn't so productive. But if your idea of productivity is the exchange of ideas and thoughts on what the models are showing as well as on the possibilities presented with the models and their evolution (not to mention the things learned on these exchanges) then I found them very productive indeed. And weenism? Even the best of us occasionally slip and let our inner weenie escape. There's no crime in that and actually lends some spice to the boards. Now sometimes the weenism can go overboard and it needs to be clamped down somewhat but I found nothing in the discussion last week that even remotely resembled that. 

Now for someone who is supposedly trying to stay out of the long range thread it seems that you are doing anything but. Your suggestion of sending red taggers in to straighten up the mess, the no posting of long range maps, your suggestion of a consensus view with no dissenting thoughts (which you have since edited out of your post), no weenism, and I think their were a few other ideas that I can't recall, all tell me that far from staying away you are actually jumping in with both feet trying to stomp out what you don't like. 

It seems that we go through this every winter for as far back as I can remember. I don't know what the solution is. But considering there are some others that feel the need to put strict guidelines on the long range discussion maybe we need two threads. One that forbids NAM maps or discussion, no snowfall maps, no banter, no weenism, consensus view on everything, no long range maps, only red taggers allowed to comment etc..., etc..., etc... Hell, you all can put what ever restrictions you want in place. After all it will be your space to do with as you want. I for one will stick to the one we have now with all it's supposed flaws. The open discussion, the occasional weenism, the on and off banter, the occasional snowfall maps and long range maps, etc... To me that is a lot more enjoyable then the restrictive board you and others seem to prefer.

[Bob Chill]

6 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

But considering there are some others that feel the need to put strict guidelines on the long range discussion maybe we need two threads. One that forbids NAM maps or discussion, no snowfall maps, no banter, no weenism, consensus view on everything, no long range maps, only red taggers allowed to comment etc..., etc..., etc... Hell, you all can put what ever restrictions you want in place. After all it will be your space to do with as you want. I for one will stick to the one we have now with all it's supposed flaws. The open discussion, the occasional weenism, the on and off banter, the occasional snowfall maps and long range maps, etc... To me that is a lot more enjoyable then the restrictive board you and others seem to prefer.

That thread would have only had 1 post this winter and there would have only been 1 word in it: "Go"

[BTRWx]

1 hour ago, mattie g said:

This is a public weather forum for weather enthusiasts. You shouldn't expect there to be detailed technical discussion in every post, especially when a pattern is crap and there's not much else to discuss.

Folks have been here for ages, and there's nothing different about what they're doing now than what has been going on for years. If something looks interesting, people will post about it and will often dig into technical details. If things aren't interesting, folks will gab about it and throw out random thoughts on the look and what might/might not go right or wrong given the pattern.

You have every right not to take part in reasoned, adult(-ish) discussion. But I don't see the need to knock others for doing so...nor for asking a mighty "red tag" to put non-red-taggers in their place. That's insulting, to be honest.

What's banter to you then?

eta: I'm not getting involved, becuase to me it seems to have been more of a lack of "adult(-ish)" thoughts lately.

[BTRWx]

49 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Have you abandoned all hope for the winter? If not, join us and you shall live today in paradise. Or Stormtrackers budding cult.

I'll post my upstate ny snowtv in a couple days if you want?

[North Balti Zen]

22 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

What's banter to you then?

eta: I'm not getting involved, becuase to me it seems to have been more of a lack of "adult(-ish)" thoughts lately.

I have no clue what you are talking about with regard to the long range thread, which has been a pretty damn awesome thread all winter.

[BTRWx]

3 hours ago, showmethesnow said:

I am glad you edited this somewhat from your original post. As it was it sounded as if you felt that those in the Long range discussion thread should reach a consensus view on a solution and then stick with it allowing no dissenting views. Needless to say I found that a quite interesting idea considering that that basically takes out any discussion in what is supposed to be a discussion thread.

Now as far as productivity, are you referring to the lack of snow in regards to the discussion of the possibilities in the longer range? I guess if your bottom line is seeing ground truth, then yeah it wasn't so productive. But if your idea of productivity is the exchange of ideas and thoughts on what the models are showing as well as on the possibilities presented with the models and their evolution (not to mention the things learned on these exchanges) then I found them very productive indeed. And weenism? Even the best of us occasionally slip and let our inner weenie escape. There's no crime in that and actually lends some spice to the boards. Now sometimes the weenism can go overboard and it needs to be clamped down somewhat but I found nothing in the discussion last week that even remotely resembled that. 

Now for someone who is supposedly trying to stay out of the long range thread it seems that you are doing anything but. Your suggestion of sending red taggers in to straighten up the mess, the no posting of long range maps, your suggestion of a consensus view with no dissenting thoughts (which you have since edited out of your post), no weenism, and I think their were a few other ideas that I can't recall, all tell me that far from staying away you are actually jumping in with both feet trying to stomp out what you don't like. 

It seems that we go through this every winter for as far back as I can remember. I don't know what the solution is. But considering there are some others that feel the need to put strict guidelines on the long range discussion maybe we need two threads. One that forbids NAM maps or discussion, no snowfall maps, no banter, no weenism, consensus view on everything, no long range maps, only red taggers allowed to comment etc..., etc..., etc... Hell, you all can put what ever restrictions you want in place. After all it will be your space to do with as you want. I for one will stick to the one we have now with all it's supposed flaws. The open discussion, the occasional weenism, the on and off banter, the occasional snowfall maps and long range maps, etc... To me that is a lot more enjoyable then the restrictive board you and others seem to prefer.

It sounds like many of us are misinterpreting each other.  This is the internet after all.  I like what you said in this post.  For what it's worth, I never editied anything.  (never edited my reasoning I should say) I clarified my reasoning in the banter thread. lol!  Now to clarify further...

I said there's too many 384 maps.  It's very clear that the 384 frame from any op precip map/surface map rarely resembles even the prior run except maybe 500 mb.  I'm not saying ppl should stick with views forever, because nwp is dynamic, no doubt.  My red tag comment was half joking.  Personally I don't think the 14+ day op maps resemble much of anything.  That's what my red tag comment was about.  When I said it, there were at least 5 people posting the 384 maps within two pages and they weren't even from the same runs.  What good does that do?  I said before that I see nothing wrong with posting those maps every so often, but last week was full of them and why I wasn't taking part.  

 

[mattie g]

33 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

What's banter to you then?

eta: I'm not getting involved, becuase to me it seems to have been more of a lack of "adult(-ish)" thoughts lately.

For me, banter is off-topic or inane discussion, but that's casting a pretty wide net. Banter always trickles into the discussion threads, but the posters around here do a good job of self-moderation when it starts getting out of hand.

Dude...when all is said and done, this forum is for fun. If we can't mess around from time to time - especially when there's no interesting weather to discuss - then what's the point of being here?

[showmethesnow]

1 minute ago, mattie g said:

For me, banter is off-topic or inane discussion, but that's casting a pretty wide net. Banter always trickles into the discussion threads, but the posters around here do a good job of self-moderation when it starts getting out of hand.

Dude...when all is said and done, this forum is for fun. If we can't mess around from time to time - especially when there's no interesting weather to discuss - then what's the point of being here?

Bingo. Give him a Gold Star.

[BTRWx]

3 minutes ago, mattie g said:

For me, banter is off-topic or inane discussion, but that's casting a pretty wide net. Banter always trickles into the discussion threads, but the posters around here do a good job of self-moderation when it starts getting out of hand.

Dude...when all is said and done, this forum is for fun. If we can't mess around from time to time - especially when there's no interesting weather to discuss - then what's the point of being here?

I tried to leave recently.  There's no account deletion option available, so we're all stuck with each other.

[mattie g]

Just now, BTRWx said:

I tried to leave recently.  There's no account deletion option available, so we're all stuck with each other.

Talk to WxWatcher. He carries the scythe, so he can do away with you...

[isohume]

Weather is some serious sh*t.

[BTRWx]

4 minutes ago, mattie g said:

Talk to WxWatcher. He carries the scythe, so he can do away with you...

Is that what you want?

[psuhoffman]

2 hours ago, BTRWx said:

I think a little more consensus in anlyses is needed unlike others have said.  Consensus is a big factor in nwp is it not?  The March thread has been anything but consensus.  There's a difference between giving analyses on pattern development and describing what each op shows at range.  For good/great weenie runs, by all *means* embrace the weenieism!  But I'm sure you'd agree that every op run does not need such discussion at such long (not medium) range.

I didn't see that much over analysis of individual op runs.  Most of it was general speculation about what the ensembles or entire suite of guidance was hinting at pattern wise and what our prospects for snow might or might not be.  AN op run is part of that equation but only a part.  Theweenie run the other day was posted as a joke mostly but who cares.  As for the way the guidance was being analyzed, again I am not sure what you expect.  Things aren't good, so you just want us to say it sucks moving on?  Some of us like to discuss.  Some of us also like to be optimistic and point out how things "COULD" go better and what to look for.  Again that is NOT a forecast.  I know I have said over and over and over again I am bearish on snow.  I am discussing what to look for and hope for to get a better result but I do NOT expect it to happen.  And I get the same vibe from others.  Bob, Showmethesnow, CAPE, all seem very realistic and grounded in their expectations or lack there of.  We are just discussing the permutations and variables of the possibility NOT the likely.  If you just want a diagnostic probability forecast that would be kind of boring.  ITS NOT GOING TO SNOW.  There end of discussion.  How much fun was that?

[H2O]

if anyone ever wants to leave all you have to do is change your password to some random numbers and letters and not write it down.Log out, delete history and never shall we meet again.

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, Bob Chill said:

That thread would have only had 1 post this winter and there would have only been 1 word in it: "Go"

LOL, you have a way with words my friend.  To me the journey is part of the fun and even if the destination sucked this year there was a process to getting there and a growing/learning experience and I am glad to have participated in it.  I feel that many others enjoy and value that process and discussion also and the opportunity to exchange ideas, learn, and enjoy the journey.  If you are one who cares only about snow on the ground or a definitive probabilities based forecast, then I can see how that thread would be annoying, but it is not the right place for you.  If you just want a forecast go to NWS and point and click.  I am always on the side of less censorship.  If you don't like a post or what some people have to say just ignore it.  I will disagree with someone but NEVER tell them they can't share their opinion or argue with me. 

[psuhoffman]

27 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Is that what you want?

I don't want anyone to feel restricted or that they cannot share their opinions.  I disagree with yours but you should feel free to argue with me and make your points.  That is part of what makes this place great. 

[BTRWx]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I don't want anyone to feel restricted or that they cannot share their opinions.  I disagree with yours but you should feel free to argue with me and make your points.  That is part of what makes this place great. 

Indeed.  I just won't be doing so in the pattern thread.

[BTRWx]

I try to be as realistic as possible.  Sometimes such ideas aren't beneficial and I've gradually been learning where that's productive versus not.  That goes beyond my presence here.

[psuhoffman]

40 minutes ago, mattie g said:

For me, banter is off-topic or inane discussion, but that's casting a pretty wide net. Banter always trickles into the discussion threads, but the posters around here do a good job of self-moderation when it starts getting out of hand.

Dude...when all is said and done, this forum is for fun. If we can't mess around from time to time - especially when there's no interesting weather to discuss - then what's the point of being here?

Amen...there is not bright line between banter and on topic, except to say if it doesn't have anything to do with the pattern it probably belongs in banter.  But sometimes its iffy and unless there is some serious storm to track who cares then if some fun leaks into the pattern discussion thread.  I guess some people are too important to simply skim through a few posts they don't like or need.  Perhaps that is the issue...I just move on when I see something I don't find useful or entertaining, and others get upset and rail about it.  But then you are wasting time complaining about your time being wasted.  hmm  Or perhaps people are just edgy because of the crap winter... 

[BTRWx]

I'll apologize if my "banter" insulted people, but I won't apologize for being who I am.

[psuhoffman]

5 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Indeed.  I just won't be doing so in the pattern thread.

I think taking a debate about what belongs in the pattern thread to banter is probably best but that doesn't mean I have a problem having the debate.  But just for the sake of this discussion, what do you think is the down side to a few people having a discussion about a long shot possibility and what the options/variables are with the pattern that could lead to a fluke event?  Given it is the long range thread and were discussion long range threats with are by nature low probability anyways...I just don't see the downside.  But perhaps I am failing to see your point of view correctly.   

[psuhoffman]

Just now, BTRWx said:

I'll apologize if my "banter" insulted people, but I won't apologize for being who I am.

I don't feel insulted, but your one post about the "red taggers" might have come off a bit derogatory to some.  There are some posters in there that know what they are talking about and implying they need a red tagger to set them straight could have been taken as insulting.  But even the comments on that seemed respectful for the most part.  People have disagreed with your opinion but I didn't see anyone really attacking you or wanting you to leave.  No one has asked you to apologize.  I value the discussion and debate, and you are entitled to your opinions even if I don't agree with all of them.  Please don't overreact to a respectful disagreement. 

[BTRWx]

26 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I think taking a debate about what belongs in the pattern thread to banter is probably best but that doesn't mean I have a problem having the debate.  But just for the sake of this discussion, what do you think is the down side to a few people having a discussion about a long shot possibility and what the options/variables are with the pattern that could lead to a fluke event?  Given it is the long range thread and were discussion long range threats with are by nature low probability anyways...I just don't see the downside.  But perhaps I am failing to see your point of view correctly.   

I don't think the long range op snap shots would lead to such a "fluke event".  I believe the chaos leading into the good look is more important.  There's a reason I (myself) am not debating as much in the pattern thread.  I've learned and beliieve it just leads to trouble more times than not.