December Banter 2018

[Maestrobjwa]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

DC still had 20.1" in 1980, it wasn't a total disaster, but suppression in several big storms prevented it from being epic.  DC was on the northern fringe of several storms that were HECS level in the southern mid atlantic that year.  It was even worse up here, my area also only had about 20" which for up here is a pretty awful disaster of a winter... It was kind of like 2010 only with NC/southern VA as the target and DC on the northern fringe...

So...why did that happen? You mean to tell me that there was no one thing in the overall seasonal trend that we can say caused that? That's a lot of bad fortune if it was random everytime...as opposed to some more dominant feature that was causing it.

[PivotPoint]

4 minutes ago, nw baltimore wx said:

Unfortunately, the need for Storm Mode is to keep posts like yours out of the thread.  If people would learn to not clutter threads with unrelated posts, we'd never need storm mode.  Just use the banter thread.

Eta:  I see your post got moved here to banter.  I'm going to assume it was you.  Well done!

This post did not get moved to banter. I wrote it in banter.

Well done to you sir! An observant one you truly are. Thank you for your comments

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

1 hour ago, NorthArlington101 said:

 

If we get a Miller A blizzard I’ll venmo you $1000.

 

Give me $1000 if we get a blizzard.. yes

[nw baltimore wx]

1 minute ago, PivotPoint said:

This post did not get moved to banter. I wrote it in bater.

Well done to you sir! An observant one you truly are. Thank you for your comments

Yeah, I had deleted my post, but my point stands.  I think Storm Mode is only a necessity to keep threads clean.  If people policed themselves, the discussion threads would be an easier and quicker read.

[Jandurin]

i.e. storm mode happens when people are posting like crap, not when a storm is going to hit

 

usually those two coincide but not always

[mappy]

the whole "storm mode" argument is really tiresome. if people would just police themselves, management wouldn't have to create a storm mode thread for everyone to post in. 

but what do i know. 

[psuhoffman]

12 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

So...why did that happen? You mean to tell me that there was no one thing in the overall seasonal trend that we can say caused that? That's a lot of bad fortune if it was random everytime...as opposed to some more dominant feature that was causing it.

You seem to doubt the role chaos plays in all this.  March 2017 a departing 50/50 leaves 12 hours too soon and we have a big sleet fest instead of a blizzard.   January 2018 the ridge axis out west is about 100 miles east of perfect and the NS phases 6 hours too late and we get flurries instead of an HECS.  Early March last year the northern stream vort dives in about 50 miles northeast of perfect and NJ gets a blizzard instead of us.  March 13th a northern stream vort dives down at the wrong time, 12 hours faster or slower and we get a MECS but it crushes it instead.  Everyone gives up and then a week later we get a snowstorm!  We could play this game with everything.  Some of our HECS storms could have been ruined had one little thing not gone right.  It's like a golf swing... so many things have to be right to get a good hit...one little thing wrong and it can screw it all up.  

As for 1980... this looks like a good pattern...January to March when the action was... great blocking...but I would say the -PNA could have been problamatic, and the trough in the Atlantic is a little south of idea...could have indicated suppression...but honestly you can't say that for individual storms looking at the h5 pattern mean.  It was just as much bad luck at the time of each storm as anything else.  We are really only talking a couple of HECS storms that hit the southern mid atlantic.  If just one of them crushes DC and it was a historic winter.  

[NorthArlington101]

Give me $1000 if we get a blizzard.. yes

This would be for this next storm, not the whole winter

[stormtracker]

57 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Lol @ storm mode yesterday... Someone should of been the voice of reason

Agreed, because that STJ s/w was going to hit us, but then saw storm mode and decided to slide south. 

[stormtracker]

14 minutes ago, Jandurin said:

i.e. storm mode happens when people are posting like crap, not when a storm is going to hit

 

usually those two coincide but not always

FINALLY!  Somebody gets it

[PivotPoint]

18 minutes ago, nw baltimore wx said:

Yeah, I had deleted my post, but my point stands.  I think Storm Mode is only a necessity to keep threads clean.  If people policed themselves, the discussion threads would be an easier and quicker read.

Lets call a spade a spade here:

There are certain posters who are allowed to have banter comments in non-banter threads and consequently NOT have their posts disappear. These posters include red-taggers, friends of moderators, moderators themselves, and those who have tenure on the board. There are PLENTY of banter comments during storm mode in storm mode threads I've read over the years. The decision process (if you can call it a process) behind the posts that get deleted and the ones that don't falls solely under the jurisdiction of the moderators (the few). 

I, myself, enjoy the complexity and individuality of any poster's unique styles and preferences when posting in any thread. I understand the need to stay on-topic and have relevant and accurate information dissemented to the board and therefore agree with the purpose/concept of moderating. However, restricting and limiting a certain poster's "voice" while purposefully NOT restricting others  because you favor them, is in my opinion, a form of censorship. As long as the posts are not morally offensive or intended to belittle or degrade any group or individual, I say let the post stand.

Agree or disagree, thats fine. That's the point of free speech by the many, unedited by the few.

[psuhoffman]

10 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Lets call a spade a spade here:

There are certain posters who are allowed to have banter comments in non-banter threads and consequently NOT have their posts disappear. These posters include red-taggers, friends of moderators, moderators themselves, and those who have tenure on the board. There are PLENTY of banter comments during storm mode in storm mode threads I've read over the years. The decision process (if you can call it a process) behind the posts that get deleted and the ones that don't falls solely under the jurisdiction of the moderators (the few). 

I, myself, enjoy the complexity and individuality of any poster's unique styles and preferences when posting in any thread. I understand the need to stay on-topic and have relevant and accurate information dissemented to the board and therefore agree with the purpose/concept of moderating. However, restricting and limiting a certain poster's "voice" while purposefully NOT restricting others  because you favor them, is in my opinion, a form of censorship. As long as the posts are not morally offensive or intended to belittle or degrade any group or individual, I say let the post stand.

Agree or disagree, thats fine. That's the point of free speech by the many, unedited by the few.

If your point is that this is subjective....well duh.  Some think something is funny and others thing its stupid.  I am probably guilty at times of posting "banter" in non banter threads.  But I try to not have it distract from the flow of the thread and side track the conversation.  And if I am told to stop or knock it off I respect the wishes of the moderators.  Maybe I still go too far for some but there are others who would and have completely derailed a thread if they weren't reigned in.    Someone has to moderate.  We know what kind of mess it would become if there was no moderation at all.  And moderating is subjective, but they are doing the best they can to manage the desire of all the members and best create good discussion in all the threads.  This seems like no big deal... you can still have the banter stuff just during storm mode do it in banter thread.  "But some people get away with it" seems like a weak sauce argument...what next "life isn't fair".  

[nw baltimore wx]

2 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Lets call a spade a spade here:

There are certain posters who are allowed to have banter comments in non-banter threads and consequently NOT have their posts disappear. These posters include red-taggers, friends of moderators, moderators themselves, and those who have tenure on the board. There are PLENTY of banter comments during storm mode in storm mode threads I've read over the years. The decision process (if you can call it a process) behind the posts that get deleted and the ones that don't falls solely under the jurisdiction of the moderators (the few). 

I, myself, enjoy the complexity and individuality of any poster's unique styles and preferences when posting in any thread. I understand the need to stay on-topic and have relevant and accurate information dissemented to the board and therefore agree with the purpose/concept of moderating. However, restricting and limiting a certain poster's "voice" while purposefully NOT restricting others  because you favor them, is in my opinion, a form of censorship. As long as the posts are not morally offensive or intended to belittle or degrade any group or individual, I say let the post stand.

Agree or disagree, thats fine. That's the point of free speech by the many, unedited by the few.

I totally agree with your first paragraph.  So what?  Don't add to the problem (and that's not directed at you specifically.  I mean everyone).

As far as paragraph two is concerned, I feel that it contradicts paragraph one.  Is it fair that some posts stay and some posts disappear?  Who cares?  If you know your post doesn't belong in a thread, then don't post it there (and again, "you" is general).  

 

[mappy]

12 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Lets call a spade a spade here:

There are certain posters who are allowed to have banter comments in non-banter threads and consequently NOT have their posts disappear. These posters include red-taggers, friends of moderators, moderators themselves, and those who have tenure on the board. There are PLENTY of banter comments during storm mode in storm mode threads I've read over the years. The decision process (if you can call it a process) behind the posts that get deleted and the ones that don't falls solely under the jurisdiction of the moderators (the few). 

I, myself, enjoy the complexity and individuality of any poster's unique styles and preferences when posting in any thread. I understand the need to stay on-topic and have relevant and accurate information dissemented to the board and therefore agree with the purpose/concept of moderating. However, restricting and limiting a certain poster's "voice" while purposefully NOT restricting others  because you favor them, is in my opinion, a form of censorship. As long as the posts are not morally offensive or intended to belittle or degrade any group or individual, I say let the post stand.

Agree or disagree, thats fine. That's the point of free speech by the many, unedited by the few.

would you like my log-in to see what we have hidden from everyone else? we don't willy-nilly pick and choose what to delete and what not to. nor are people's posts removed out of spite or due to having "favorites". If a banter post doesn't get removed, when others may feel it should, there probably is a reasonable explanation. No one around to see it, or when they finally do see the post its hours old and not worth removing, just as an example. We have also asked that people report posts they feel should be brought to the attention of moderators, and as far as i know, not many people do that. I removed a handful of posts yesterday, pre-storm mode. Two from a forum member cursing at others, and a few others between a couple people who were bantering back and forth and you could see it was going to get out of hand. I'm not sure I have removed any since storm mode went into effect, but have seen only a few be removed, usually very off topic and just adding clutter. 

We deal with this every year, which is a shame, as you said... you've been around for a while and have seen things over time, yet we still have this silly argument year after year after year. 

[WxUSAF]

I LOVE moderation policy discussions. My favorite.

[stormtracker]

25 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Lets call a spade a spade here:

There are certain posters who are allowed to have banter comments in non-banter threads and consequently NOT have their posts disappear. These posters include red-taggers, friends of moderators, moderators themselves, and those who have tenure on the board. There are PLENTY of banter comments during storm mode in storm mode threads I've read over the years. The decision process (if you can call it a process) behind the posts that get deleted and the ones that don't falls solely under the jurisdiction of the moderators (the few). 

I, myself, enjoy the complexity and individuality of any poster's unique styles and preferences when posting in any thread. I understand the need to stay on-topic and have relevant and accurate information dissemented to the board and therefore agree with the purpose/concept of moderating. However, restricting and limiting a certain poster's "voice" while purposefully NOT restricting others  because you favor them, is in my opinion, a form of censorship. As long as the posts are not morally offensive or intended to belittle or degrade any group or individual, I say let the post stand.

Agree or disagree, thats fine. That's the point of free speech by the many, unedited by the few.

You never have to fear repercussions for speaking your mind, I (and the rest of the staff) don't and SHOULDN'T work like that.  You can call me the worst admin in history and I wouldn't do one thing to you or your account and I wouldn't let anybody else do anything to your account.    It is what it is.

And of course there is some bias at play with MINOR things like banter here and there.  But there is no censorship here, so let's stop with the maudlin cries of it.   You are free to say what you want, provided that it's in the right thread.  

[H2O]

I hide posts when they don't give me heart likes, trophy likes or laughy likes.  You want posts to stay visible?  I have a PayPal account thats low.  

[yoda]

7 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

I LOVE moderation policy discussions. My favorite.

I hope you get 1 inch of moderation posts to deal with

[stormtracker]

11 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

I LOVE moderation policy discussions. My favorite.

It's like an annual tradition here!  Happy Moderator Policy Discussion Day!

[H2O]

i also accept donations of booze and offers for cuddling.

[Jandurin]

tbf it happens on every forum ever

[Maestrobjwa]

30 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You seem to doubt the role chaos plays in all this.  March 2017 a departing 50/50 leaves 12 hours too soon and we have a big sleet fest instead of a blizzard.   January 2018 the ridge axis out west is about 100 miles east of perfect and the NS phases 6 hours too late and we get flurries instead of an HECS.  Early March last year the northern stream vort dives in about 50 miles northeast of perfect and NJ gets a blizzard instead of us.  March 13th a northern stream vort dives down at the wrong time, 12 hours faster or slower and we get a MECS but it crushes it instead.  Everyone gives up and then a week later we get a snowstorm!  We could play this game with everything.  Some of our HECS storms could have been ruined had one little thing not gone right.  It's like a golf swing... so many things have to be right to get a good hit...one little thing wrong and it can screw it all up.  

As for 1980... this looks like a good pattern...January to March when the action was... great blocking...but I would say the -PNA could have been problamatic, and the trough in the Atlantic is a little south of idea...could have indicated suppression...but honestly you can't say that for individual storms looking at the h5 pattern mean.  It was just as much bad luck at the time of each storm as anything else.  We are really only talking a couple of HECS storms that hit the southern mid atlantic.  If just one of them crushes DC and it was a historic winter.  

Well, I wouldn't say I doubt the chaos element...I just don't like it, lol Like...I wanna be able to see something 5-7 days and know for a fact either it will work or not. 

But really...it's the close misses that outright depress me the most. I hate seeing somewhere just above or below getting the snow we should've gotten...particularly when it happens multiple times a year! (Feels like someone intentionally robs us just because)  And the tracking leading up...I get nervous with model runs, and the bad trends are draining. (and then if it misses it takes me a day to recover...it's awful. And I get ticked when I hear about other people's snow)

And really...you mentioned having realistic expectations...well, I think, prior to 2013/14, I knew it wouldn't snow every year, but I had no clue as to how close it can come (because I wasn't following weather models until that winter).

[stormtracker]

7 minutes ago, H2O said:

i also accept donations of booze and offers for cuddling.

I mean, booze I can get anywhere.  Cuddling is where it's at.  See you around 5

[ravensrule]

34 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Lets call a spade a spade here:

There are certain posters who are allowed to have banter comments in non-banter threads and consequently NOT have their posts disappear. These posters include red-taggers, friends of moderators, moderators themselves, and those who have tenure on the board. There are PLENTY of banter comments during storm mode in storm mode threads I've read over the years. The decision process (if you can call it a process) behind the posts that get deleted and the ones that don't falls solely under the jurisdiction of the moderators (the few). 

I, myself, enjoy the complexity and individuality of any poster's unique styles and preferences when posting in any thread. I understand the need to stay on-topic and have relevant and accurate information dissemented to the board and therefore agree with the purpose/concept of moderating. However, restricting and limiting a certain poster's "voice" while purposefully NOT restricting others  because you favor them, is in my opinion, a form of censorship. As long as the posts are not morally offensive or intended to belittle or degrade any group or individual, I say let the post stand.

Agree or disagree, thats fine. That's the point of free speech by the many, unedited by the few.

I have tenure. H20 and Mappy are very close friends, yet my posts still disappear. 

[ravensrule]

10 minutes ago, yoda said:

I hope you get 1 inch of moderation posts to deal with

That's double what he is used to. 

[ravensrule]

8 minutes ago, H2O said:

i also accept donations of booze and offers for cuddling.

I would like to spoon and fork you. 

[ravensrule]

4 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

I mean, booze I can get anywhere.  Cuddling is where it's at.  See you around 5

Cheater. You had promised me 5.

[H2O]

2 minutes ago, ravensrule said:

I have tenure. H20 and Mappy are very close friends, yet my posts still disappear. 

all of them?  Lets make sure you have proof ALL your posts get moderated before mouthing off.  

 

And you can always mitchnick yourself if it bothers you that much.

[H2O]

5 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

I mean, booze I can get anywhere.  Cuddling is where it's at.  See you around 5

I'll be there in my flannel pajamas.  Special Xmas ones.  

[ravensrule]

1 minute ago, H2O said:

all of them?  Lets make sure you have proof ALL your posts get moderated before mouthing off.  

 

And you can always mitchnick yourself if it bothers you that much.

Apparently humor eludes you. I was KIDDING. My posts can't get moderated. I rarely post in the storm threads anymore. I still love you though.