This is unacceptable.

[Douglas Mitchell]

While everyone else seems to be jumping on this bandwagon of praise for the "new" Stormtrack, I refuse to believe that restricting access to ST is somehow a "good thing". As a matter of fact, I think this is the worst thing to happen to ST, ever. Sure, I agree with the restructuring efforts, as I was unable to resist the tempetation of engaging in the flame wars on EE, and to the EE forum, I say "Good Riddance." It's nice to have a clean slate.

But it's an insult, a slap in the face and a kick in the groin to have this rule not only stand, but to have it widely supported.

You're running down the path of death when you start trying to differentiate between a chaser and an enthusiast. Even in the thread prior to ST's restructuring, a fight broke out between two widely-known chasers, over the definition of a chaser. Yet, now we're trying to restrict membership based on a definition that no one can agree on. So great, you start giving genuine enthusiasts, future chasers, and other people who can not chase for what ever reasons the big old boot.

So while all these "chasers" bicker and complain about the degradation of the ST forum, they somehow create a strawman about these "non-chasers" and beat the hell out of it. Problem is, from my observations, most of the drama and fighting on ST has been from the actual "chasers" themselves!!! MROB, Karen/Kiel/Kevin vs. May 21st, and the Billy Griffin incident, perhaps the 3 biggest dramas on ST in the past year, have all involved "chasers", not some strawman non-chasers. I fought on the EE threads with Craig Maire and Chris Hayes, all of us chasers. I was even mocked by Chris Sokol, a MODERATOR on this board. So, if everyone would PLEASE step down from this "chaser uber alles" pedestal and realize that the non-chasers contribute a lot to the forum as well. Simon Lussardi comes to mind, just off the top of my head.

And then there's the outcry for a "return to ST's roots", whatever that means. As far as I can tell, you didn't need to be a chaser to subscribe to the ST Magazine. This is nothing more than a empty, hollow nostalgic cry for a time that never existed.

Regardless if you like to elevate yourself to this "Super stormchaser" position, remember this: We are ALL weather weenies at heart, and at one time, you were nothing more than that. You weren't born chasing storms. I wouldn't have been allowed on this board based on this new restriction a mere 2-3 years ago. And I find it ironic that the leader of this anti-newbie crusade, Nick Grillo, has not driven a single mile storm chasing. Not a personal attack, just a fact.

You want to know what to do? Infuse a backbone into the mods and clean up these "posts" and hand out consequences to those who abuse the rules, but for the love of all things holy, don't don't don't restrict access to those who benefit from participation. [/i]

[Jeff Snyder]

And then there's the outcry for a "return to ST's roots", whatever that means. As far as I can tell, you didn't need to be a chaser to subscribe to the ST Magazine. This is nothing more than a empty, hollow nostalgic cry for a time that never existed.


Yes, you didn't need to be a chaser to read the publication, just as you don't need to be a chaser (or a member) to read Stormtrack discussions. As it is now, all members of the public can view and read stormtrack discussions, posts, threads, etc. How many stories did you read in the old ST publications from non-chasers? I don't have a opinion one way or the other right now, but it's not like non-chasers can't even read and learn from discussions. A focus on storm chasing in the membership doesn't prevent non-members from learning, just as it didn't prevent non-chasers from learning when ST was a publication.

[jaybarnsmith]

What you'll find and what I failed to notice before is the fact that once a chaser is accused of doing something bad they will quickly be reclassified as a 'non-chaser'. This was rather clear from what ive heard of the MROB deal and the Billy Griffin event.

As for the definition of storm chasers, it will end up having to be very close to that of the standard weather weenies. If its not you end up with a huge problem of being able to verify that infact someone is a chaser. Joe Troll is just going to make up some lame stories and get membership. The real person who enjoys weather and has something of value to say isn't going to post.

It remains to be seem how the new moderators play out, hopefully they can be a big part of keeping the forum clean. I have strong feelings on all of this however for now I think a wait and see approach is best.

I stand by what I said in the other post that the people here need to learn how to look past the fact that someone insulted them on the internet. Or the fact that someone had some fun at the expense of someone else because they made a bad forecast. If everyone was more concerned about having a good time and chasing storms while being less concerned about how they come out looking at the end of the day then the old forum would have worked just fine.

[Douglas Mitchell]

But certainly you must recognize that *participation* is also key. The ability to ask questions, give input from outside the chasing world (yes, such a thing exists!!!), and post images from events that were not viewed by storm chasers. The abusive, attacking, fluff-posting "non-chaser" strawman still lives...

[Darin Brunin]

I back you 100% Doug. It's funny to see the people who were fighting the "elite" forum turn around and say that they want to cut off people from joining Stormtrack who don't have the "credentials". Is that not "elitism" in itself? I am not picking on Nick Grillo but what would he have done when he was 13-14 and someone told him that he did not belong here. Nick may have slipped by but there will be many young chasers just like Nick who will be shunned away if this is allowed to continue.

Sure....restricting access to Stormtrack might make the forum more clean but it's only going to make the roads around a supercell a lot more dirty. Newbie chasers look up to experienced chasers in a lot of ways. For every post that an experienced chaser puts up I would bet that a couple newbies are reading and studying it to get better. If there is restricted access this is only going to make the learning process for newbie chasers last that much longer.

Was there really anything wrong with the way that the old forum was? And what is changing the titles of the sections of the forum going to do to make it better? Tougher moderation?.....maybe for a while but then Stormtrack will return to its old self.

For any of you who think you don't belong any more because of certain new "guidelines".....there is a great forum where people will greet you will open arms, they will answer any question that you may have without hesitation, and they sure as hell won't slam you for being a newbie chaser. Go here http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=10550

Change isn't always a good thing....
Darin

[Douglas Mitchell]

I back you 100% Doug. It's funny to see the people who were fighting the "elite" forum turn around and say that they want to cut off people from joining Stormtrack who don't have the "credentials". Is that not "elitism" in itself? I am not picking on Nick Grillo but what would he have done when he was 13-14 and someone told him that he did not belong here. Nick may have slipped by but there will be many young chasers just like Nick who will be shunned away if this is allowed to continue.

Sure....restricting access to Stormtrack might make the forum more clean but it's only going to make the roads around a supercell a lot more dirty. Newbie chasers look up to experienced chasers in a lot of ways. For every post that an experienced chaser puts up I would bet that a couple newbies are reading and studying it to get better. If there is restricted access this is only going to make the learning process for newbie chasers last that much longer.

Was there really anything wrong with the way that the old forum was? And what is changing the titles of the sections of the forum going to do to make it better? Tougher moderation?.....maybe for a while but then Stormtrack will return to its old self.

For any of you who think you don't belong any more because of certain new "guidelines".....there is a great forum where people will greet you will open arms, they will answer any question that you may have without hesitation, and they sure as hell won't slam you for being a newbie chaser. Go here http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=10550

Change isn't always a good thing....
Darin

The chasing world is an extremely intimidating world, I know from *personal experience*. I was lucky enough to have parents who were able to afford a chase tour for me. And to think that you want to give all these kids who don't have the same opportunities I did a big ol' metaphorical middle finger just because of some "feel good" effort to clean up garbage that was primarily caused by chasers themselves, well, that just reeks of elitism. If ST wants to embrace this image, you can wallow in your shallow world of "chaser pride". Just remember this, the REAL world doesn't give a rats about storm chasing, start living in it.

[Mike Peregrine]

Well I can't believe I'm actually still posting about this ... lol. I had just about come to the conclusion that my public posting days were spent. But I think some of the problems we're actually seeing here is probably just a shifting of the focus in ST from one generation to the next. It's not a bad thing. I don't think anyone looks down on newer chasers - I know I'm glad to see new blood around town and its been refreshing for me to get to know people like Doug and Darin both.

At the same time, there may be kind of a new generation gap showing up, I'm not really sure how to define it. Don't want to over-analyze here, but there's a group of chasers who started in the 70s and 80s who became friends and trust each other and still stick together today. I know I don't personally fit in with that group ... I wouldn't even know where to start or what to say. There's another group that started in the 90s who I think might be beginning to evolve into a peer group similar to the generation before them. There's another post millenium group who are also now making their own way, and after them we'll see the next generation.

But it's kind of like sticking with your former classmates or the folks you start college with ... most people don't naturally become tight friends with the following generation. You don't view the next generation as negative, you just hang with the people you are familiar with. You have the choice to either spend a lot of time helping someone make progress, or you could concentrate your efforts on continuing to make your own progress - it's just a judgment call each person has to make for themselves. For some folks, helping the next generation is seen as a noble pursuit and an obligation to pass the torch - that's not a bad way of looking at it, really. At the same time, I also can't personally see it as a selfish thing when people choose instead to move ahead within the confines of their own peer group ... it's the human way to keep climbing and not look back. Hopefully that makes sense. I don't really have the answer here ... maybe ST should remain open and free to each new generation so that they can have a place to start somewhere. But I do still feel pretty strongly about this ... that ST is for storm chasers and not every brand of weather weenie out there. There are hundreds of boards that cater to weather. Stormtrack was intended and designed from the start with chasers in mind. Sorry if anyone else sees it differently - but that is indeed the history of this organization. ST is a great all-around resource for weather, but that is because chasers made it that way. ST was built by people who go out and sit under supercells.

At the same time none of us really have the right to call anyone down who choose otherwise and seek the association of those who they have been working with for a long time. It's a personal choice and I have trouble making a judgment on either direction a person ultimately decides to take in the matter.

[Scott Olson]

I agree with Mike here. Stormtrack was never meant to be a forum for people who were just simply interested in weather. Granted im sure there are alot of people on this forum who don't chase but have contributed many articles, questions, etc. And thats great but in the end Stormtrack was created with one thing in mind and thats to bring people together who chase storms in order to form a community and pass knowledge/strategy/etc. This is not saying that the non-chasers are the reason for all the noise or weren't contributing anything. Thats just not true! There is no intention of trying to create an elitism. Stormtrack was always intended for Storm Chasers but others were allowed to participate. That part has changed for now and it's not clear exactly whether that is going to say or whether the Admin just needs some time to get things under control before we start accepting users again.

-Scott Olson

[Jason_Politte]

This is unacceptable?? IMO, the only thing unacceptable is that it apparently can't be said enough by the VERY vocal minority that they don't like the changes. It just goes on and on and on. Is it not enough to say one's peace, let your voice be heard, and continue posting and contributing to interesting threads.

Was I vocal about what I considered to be the degredation of Storm Track during it's last life? Yes, I, in collaboration with Scott Blair, wrote about it in an editorial (see http://www.onthefront.ws/sc2003.htm), and yes, I did bring it up occasionally within site discussion, most notably in the discussion regarding the Hall of Flames. But one thing I did not do was come here on a forum and site owned by Tim Vasquez and continuously whine about it. I stayed away from what I disliked about ST and posted to threads that piqued my interest.

IMO, Jeff Snyder hit the nail on the head in his reply. Newbies are not discouraged from learning from ST - they are free to peruse the board and learn from what's posted here. There are an immense number of sources to learn from on the internet regarding storm chasing and meteorology. All one has to do is a bit of research, and that, as far as I'm concerned, is the best way to learn. I do not believe that those new to chasing should be discouraged from joining ST, but they should at the very least be out there chasing.

Jason

[Bill Hamilton]

I would have to agree with Mike on this topic as well. In everything we do we look for others who have had the same life experiences and tend to stay close to them.
I also know that I wouldn't mind having some of the younger members around as well. Chris Sanner and Nick Grillo (even as obnoxious as he has been in the past :wink: ) are a couple of chasers who hold the passion that veteran chasers have.
Yes, there is a generation gap but most of us can learn from either side.

[Bill Tabor]

I think you guys are missing the point. This is not about 'elitism' it's about having a focused forum and low 'signal to noise ratio'.

Read some of my thoughts here: http://stormtrack.org/forum/viewtopic.php?...t=7776&start=15 (http://stormtrack.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7776&start=15)

They aren't trying to kick out or prevent newbie chasers or those interested in becoming chasers. Only various folks on the internet that are non-chase interested that just happen to spend all their time in EE type areas, and possibly cause problems elsewhere with out really being chase centered in the first place.

If this is a forum for chasing, and chasers and everything chase related then why spend extra resources maintaining folks that could care less about chasing and have nothing to contribute but problems?

I'm not in charge of membership but I'd personally allow anyone that has an interest in chasing in some form or fashion at some level of membership.

Anyway that's why the concentration on how much people post in Everything Else versus chase related topics.

People aren't even going to get kicked out if they are interested in chase topics and contribute something useful and make a good attempt.

[Chris Sokol]

I was even mocked by Chris Sokol, a MODERATOR on this board.

No sir, you were not. The comment that you are refering to was meant in all sincerity. If you felt that the only reason that I made it was to mock you, then for that (and only that), I apologize. If you wish to discuss this further, feel free to do so in PM, as I will not discuss this further on the board.

[Douglas Mitchell]

1. Accept anyone with a genuine interest in storms

2. Weed out your abusers with more aggressive modding.

3. Quit placing blame on "non-chasers" for "old" ST's problems.

4. Recognize drama created by "chasers" was real reason for ST restructuring.

5. Have a couple drinks.

[Scott Olson]

1. Accept anyone with a genuine interest in storms

2. Weed out your abusers with more aggressive modding.

3. Quit placing blame on "non-chasers" for "old" ST's problems.

4. Recognize drama created by "chasers" was real reason for ST restructuring.

5. Have a couple drinks.
I never remember chasers blaming non-chasers for the problems. All the problems were forum wide and the reason for restricting the membership to active chasers was because that is the orignal intention of Stormtrack.

[Douglas Mitchell]

It would be a tragedy to have, IMO, the number one resource for both storm chasers and storm enthusiasts alike to turn the cold shoulder to those who wish to participate fairly. I am basing this off my own personal experience, I would've KILLED to be able to interact with storm chasers at a much younger age, rather than peruse my TVC tapes till they died. Sure, allow them to "view" the forums, but you might as well be telling these people to f*** off if you're not going to allow them to ask legitimate questions, post legitimate pictures or even let them attempt to find someone to bring them chasing for the first time.

The answer is more agressive modding, NOT excluding others.

[Aaron Kennedy]

Stormtrack x2
serving chasers since 1977

I don't see enthusiasts in there... hmph. I'm all for keeping users who can contribute or show dedication to the hobby of storm chasing. You might not be a storm chaser, but if you can discuss/write articles about chasing (latest techology, anayzing data for chasing, etc.) then sure... come on in.

If you're just interested in storms... go ahead and read ST and go post on wright-weather or storm2k.

Just my two cents.

Aaron

[Robert Dewey]

I agree with Aaron... If these people can't contribute, then why do they need to be here? Most of the information people would ask here can be found on the internet, as the internet is the worlds largest and most amended "book" available. If they don't want to search for it, then that just means they don't care enough to learn about it. All of my meteorological experience and learning came via the internet, and if it worked for me, it will work for others. I guess if it is REALLY wanted, Tim V. could just setup a single forum that is write accessable to newbies, while keeping all of the other forums locked... That way they could still ask questions, but not interfere with anything else.

The things I'm not understanding though, is how one will prove that:

1) They are a chaser or;
2) They have meteorological experience...

I certainly couldn't produce a meteorological background check, as I learned everything from the internet... And, I don't have many photos online. My photos are all printed and personal use only - so would I be left out?

[David Wolfson]

A substantial number of serious and old-tyme stormchasers cannot drink for one reason or another, Doug! :wink: So I must take definite exception with #5!

More seriously, I expect there'll end up being some tweaking about what is and isn't a non-chasing thread or post. IMO for example there are already several threads in B&G that don't belong there. There's also a worthwhile discussion to be had between younguns or newbies and oldsters and gurus about the difference between the sort of joshing and criticism that comes from basic affection and the desire to teach, and put-downs or jealousy. Sometimes the difference doesn't translate very well in print.

[Douglas Mitchell]

And ST wasn't catering to chasers before?

Give me a break, you're not taking about NOT serving chasers here...you're talking about ONLY serving chasers, a definition no one can agree on. And the forum isn't setup for just storm chasing related articles, there's still the "Bar and Grill" place.

Allow ST for all storm chasing and storm related posts.

[Mike Peregrine]

Rob Dewey's question is good ... the way that the first online ST members got to know who was chasing and who wasn't came with time and seeing each other's reports and photos. You get to know after hearing the reports - even the bust reports - that people are actually out there doing it. And the meteorological stuff shows up along the way too ... people are usually stronger in one or the other of those two, and a few are even strong at both. The only other way to know for sure apart from hearing reports is if the person has an active website ... with photos, logs or both. Maybe we could start an organization to license and pass out official chase chase identification cards ... LOL ... time to shift the focus to another emotional topic.

[Robert Edmonds]

Umm... would like to note that I have not given reports because I can't put my photos up. My scanner is in storage untill the start of school. Also, my website is not tailored to storm chasing, as I wish to keep it "artistic". Most of my weather photos are not of the quality I like, due to the style I wish to partake upon in photography. So this is why I do not feel we should "check up" on chasers to make sure they're chasing. Plus how do you define whether people are chasing enough. Some from other countries only can make it over to the plains for a week. Others may have more pressing matters for a season, and will resume later.

*edit* because I can't spell

[Bill Tabor]

The answer is more agressive modding, NOT excluding others.

Obviously you didn't read any of my posts on the subject.

Once again (as I see it) no one is being excluded as long as they have a focus on chasing. People currently under membership can still be members and post and contribute to chasing. If ratio is over 60% no B&G. If inactive then = kick. New members must show interest in chasing or be chasers. The appropriate mechanism for choosing new members as far as I know is yet to be determined; however I doubt Tim and Co would exclude people really interested in chasing from taking part.

This is only focusing the board on what it is supposed to be about - Chasing. If people have NO interest in chasing why should they be here?

The above is clear if you read the new mandatory instructions as far as I can tell. I won't repeat this again. We could cover this ground and repeat the same things over and over and never get anywhere or come to any conclusions. If you choose to disregard the obvious then as far as I can tell you are just trying to cause disruption and dissention. That is something the new Stormtrack is trying to avoid.

[Mike Peregrine]

I think Bill is probably correct ... you don't need to prove your credentials, as long as you come with the sole intent of chase-talk. There are lots of folks in the same boat as Robert, I'm sure. If chasers decide if and when they would like to do anything different, that is now up to them. The point is pretty much moot now that ST has closed the private forum.

[Douglas Mitchell]

The answer is more agressive modding, NOT excluding others.

Obviously you didn't read any of my posts on the subject.

Once again (as I see it) no one is being excluded as long as they have a focus on chasing. People currently under membership can still be members and post and contribute to chasing. If ratio is over 60% no B&G. If inactive then = kick. New members must show interest in chasing or be chasers. The appropriate mechanism for choosing new members as far as I know is yet to be determined; however I doubt Tim and Co would exclude people really interested in chasing from taking part.

This is only focusing the board on what it is supposed to be about - Chasing. If people have NO interest in chasing why should they be here?

The above is clear if you read the new mandatory instructions as far as I can tell. I won't repeat this again. We could cover this ground and repeat the same things over and over and never get anywhere or come to any conclusions. If you choose to disregard the obvious then as far as I can tell you are just trying to cause disruption and dissention. That is something the new Stormtrack is trying to avoid.

As far as I see it, there are still several people that are gung-ho on the "chaser-only" membership requirement and its still written in the new rules that new members must be either active chasers or active mets. Still too strict...

[Steve Miller OK]

Okay, I can't stand it - I have to chime in.
I believe the restructure is welcomed and long overdue. The new tougher requirements for entry, I agree, could affect the ability for new "chasers" or enthusiasts who are interested in chasing to interact with veteran chasers and learn.
My solution, if posting in the "Bar and Grill" and basically not contributing anything chase-worthy to the board is the primary reason our administrator has changed the requirements, is to simply adjust the % of posts ratio. Right now if we have more than 60% of our posts in "Bar and Grill" or what was "EE", we get our "Bar and Grill" posting privileges revoked. How about increasing that to ratio to 50/50 and seeing if that helps with participation on the actual chasing and forecasting side of things. If someone fails to post for a certain amount of time or if the account becomes dormant, that will be grounds for termination of the account and re-application will be required.
There are plenty of places on the internet to go talk about politics, current events and whatever other crap I have seen in EE in the past. Why make it a part of a storm chasing forum?
I'm done...
I'm no moderator but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night...

[Rob_Davis]

This is only focusing the board on what it is supposed to be about - Chasing. If people have NO interest in chasing why should they be here?
Just to illustrate the potential problems of open membership here, let me ask this. How many of you ever go click on the names of the "Newest Member" as they appear at the bottom of the index page? Probably not many of you, but I do. The findings are interesting. Probably well over 95 percent of new applicants fall into one of these two categories:

1. People who didn't even bother to read the TOS before signing up, resulting in using a screen name like, "TornadoMan" or "SuperChaser."

2. Spammers who signed up only to get the link to their drugs-by-mail business posted in another forum.

If you weed those idiots out, what you have left falls FAR short of being a steady influx of newcomers. Certainly not the marauding hoardes that some seem to be concerned about. Therefore, screening that handful of people per week who actually follow the sign-up rules really doesn't seem like that daunting of a task.

We definitely have to protect the community from degradation. That is a given. But you can only make a room so airtight before you finally cut off your own oxygen supply.

[Bill Tabor]

Doug, I kind of like your suggestion #5 though.

I could go for a good beer about now. :lol:

[Douglas Mitchell]

Doug, I kind of like your suggestion #5 though.

I could go for a good beer about now. :lol:

God, couldn't we all? :lol:

[Scott Olson]

I don't think that is to strict. When I come on Stormtrack I come on to talk/share ideas with other storm chasers. If I just want to talk about weather and such I'll usually go on J squared or Storm2k. Maybe that seems exclusive but thats kinda the idea. Stormtrack is a private association, privately owned and has no obligation to provide access to non-stormchasers. There are tons of weather interest forums all over the net and Stormtracks history of existing as both a magazine and forum is built on Storm Chasing exclusively.

[Jeff Snyder]

As far as I see it, there are still several people that are gung-ho on the "chaser-only" membership requirement and its still written in the new rules that new members must be either active chasers or active mets. Still too strict...

Stormtrack is a storm chasing community. I agree with Aaron -- as long as someone is here to contribute to the storm chasing community, I have no problem with it. On the other hand, if someone has never chased, has no intention of ever chasing, and is only here to look at pictures, then I'm not so sure. I mean, why be a member if you aren't planning on contributing to the storm chasing community? There is NOTHING wrong with any member of the public viewing threads/posts/discussions, but why accept members who have no intention of ever contributing to storm chasing? IF they don't plan on contributing, why apply for membership, which essentially just gives permission to post?

[Douglas Mitchell]

I don't think that is to strict. When I come on Stormtrack I come on to talk/share ideas with other storm chasers. If I just want to talk about weather and such I'll usually go on J squared or Storm2k. Maybe that seems exclusive but thats kinda the idea. Stormtrack is a private association, privately owned and has no obligation to provide access to non-stormchasers. There are tons of weather interest forums all over the net and Stormtracks history of existing as both a magazine and forum is built on Storm Chasing exclusively.

I know it has no obligations to anyone, but does that mean we should strictly cater to chasers only? I have no official say in it, but I would be severely disappointed if said rules stand. It seems to be that despite the disagreement, we are *slowly* moving towards some sort of compromise. I will back down from "weather enthusiast" and say "storm enthusiast" while many on here seem to have no problem allowing such people while I was focusing on those who are heading for the chaser-only membership requirement. The biggest issue remains the allowance of posts that pertain strictly to storm chasing itself, I think that posts pertaining to just storms in general should be allowed, along with your assorted random non-political/religious based crap in the Bar and Grill area. That and posts that are fluff in nature should be deleted and proper action taken against offending parties. That and I don't think that enthusiast has to be interested in chasing, just as long as they are interested in storms and are willing to participate properly and accordingly.

[Mikey Gribble]

With as diverse of a group of members as we have you are never going to make everyone happy. You have to draw the line on membership somewhere and the more I read on the topic the more I am leaning towards thinking maybe membership should be limited to chasers, mets, etc. We already made one compromise to get where we are now. There was a group of people who were upset about flame wars and post quality going down and I think they had to give up more in this latest compromise than those who were opposed to the Core. Perhaps we should accomodate that group now. It's not like weather enthusiasts can't read posts. Membership being granted to nonchasers is not going to improve their opportunity to learn (minus being able to ask specific questions), but it will certainly increase the number of flame wars and frivolous posts and ultimately the quality of ST. Not that I think nonchasers are any more likely to start flame wars and make frivolous posts than chasers. It is just that flame wars and frivolous posts are somewhat proportional to the number of members you have. It is an inevitable consequence of increasing your number of posters. As others have already pointed out, there are plenty of websites and forums that cater to weather enthusiasts. If we want a high quality forum then we need to make some tough decisions and IMO cutting down membership is one of them.

[Rob_Davis]

That is a good point, Jeff. Even newbies can learn from reading the forum. If they want to interact with an active chaser and learn more or ask question, all they have to do is go to a few chasers websites and start e-mailing. Heck, most members have a website and a link to it under all their posts. It simply isn't hard for somebody who is serious about becoming part of the community to do a little research, make a few contacts, and work their way in. You don't have to pass a met exam. You simply have to make a minimal effort to show that you are seriously commited the hobby and being an active member. Anybody that can't give us that minimal demonstration wasn't really serious to begin with.

[Bill Hamilton]

There are a few people on here who will not be happy even if everyone was allowed to be a member. This is FIRST AND FOREMOST a STORMCHASING site. If all you want to do is complain about how unfair it is then go to the ACLU website, I am sure they will chat with you.

[David Drummond]

Here are a couple of other ways to look at it outside of our chaser box here.

Let's suppose we have a Chevy car forum? It's a forum about Chevy cars and the people who restore them, work on them and drive them. Now should that forum cater to other car make owners? How about the casual guys who like to go and watch the Chevys at the racetrack, but the guy owns a Ford?

Or even a reverse look at it....

What do you think would happen if we all showed up over on a political or religious forum and started demanding we be allowed to post about all our chasing stuff?

Here's one. I am interested in making some Amateur Films..... should I be allowed to join in forums that Hollywood directors use to talk shop?

Or how about Patrick Ware...(gonna use you for an example for a second here). He's an accomplished career airline pilot. I would be willing to bet he and other pilots like him have a place (maybe a forum) where they hang out and talk shop. Would it seem right for someone who is a flying enthusiast, who maybe has flown a few hundred hours in Microsoft Flight Simulator to join their forums and participate? He's a great guy and probably willing to give pointers to any up and coming pilots, but you can bet they like a place to talk serious shop away from that as well.

Just trying to present some alternative ways of looking at it.

[Douglas Mitchell]

There are a few people on here who will not be happy even if everyone was allowed to be a member. This is FIRST AND FOREMOST a STORMCHASING site. If all you want to do is complain about how unfair it is then go to the ACLU website, I am sure they will chat with you.

Politics...and a cheap shot.

[Bill Hamilton]

Not politics, just stating that it seems that for every suggestion there seems to be a reason why it is unfair.
Cheap shot? Maybe but it makes my point. 8)

[Douglas Mitchell]

Invoking the ACLU is a political issue. The post and subsequent responses should be deleted.

[Mikey Gribble]

That is not a political issue Douglas. He was simply pointing towards a website that takes complaints about violations of your rights.

[Douglas Mitchell]

To deny that the post was not meant to be both somewhat political or flame bait is asinine. The post and all of the responses should be deleted.

[George Tincher]

I applaud getting rid of the EE. That forum was a pit of vipers. With it gone, the site will be much better.

I'm not yet sure what I think about the other part. I hope that accepting new members hasn't been completely stopped. I wouldn't mind tougher screening or whatever it takes to weed out the wrong people. But I do hope that there will be a process by which new people can join. If people who have no interest or ties to chasing aren't allowed, I don't think I'll lose any sleep over it. The only thing I would disagree with is completely closing the doors to new meberships. From what I have read, that's not the case.

Overall, I am happy with the changes I've seen thus far. I think we'll have a more clean and tidy forum, with far fewer flame wars as a result of politics, relion or other controversial subjects.

[Bill Tabor]

Overall, I am happy with the changes I've seen thus far. I think we'll have a more clean and tidy forum, with far fewer flame wars as a result of politics, relion or other controversial subjects.

I agree George. I think it's good and will probably be a healthy improvement to the quality of the forum.

I think I'm still looking down at some chasers based on some of the poltical stuff I read from them in the old forum. Politics - such as Presidential election topics is divisive. What we don't need is members and forum places where we can all get mad at each other. I think keeping it limited more in scope to chasing makes it easier for us to bond based on commonality.

[John Diel]

I've managed to stay out of this fray so far. I may be getting into some hot water here, but my take on this particular thread is that is is no longer informative, nor even remotely about weather or chasing. Yes, it IS about ST and where it may or may not be going, but it's becoming more of a testosterone contest rather than a "discussion". It's one thing to disagree and put your reasons for that disagreement forth for all to see. It's yet another to defend those reasons. However, calling for someone's posts on what I read as an analogy for comparison is uncalled for.

Ladies and Gentlemen (trying to remain reasonable here), I would suggest that no one post to this for 24 hours and let things cool down. Get things back in perspective and attempt to keep your feelings in check.

If this thread continues the way it's going, it will only serve to alienate one or two people from the rest of the community and continue to divide this group as a whole. If it DOES continue the way it's currently going, I would ask that a moderator lock it down.

This is getting us (as a group) no where. It's way to easy to infer something bad from the written word than to actually speak to someone face to face. Please keep that in mind. If someone feels that they are being slighted, mocked, or simply ignored, take it in stride. Don't try to create a division in which no one wins. We are all supposedly adults (most of us anyway) and as such, should have enough responsibility to take our medicine and go on.

Keep the heat in check and let's try and make this work.

[Mike Umscheid]

Or how about Patrick Ware...(gonna use you for an example for a second here). He's an accomplished career airline pilot. I would be willing to bet he and other pilots like him have a place (maybe a forum) where they hang out and talk shop. Would it seem right for someone who is a flying enthusiast, who maybe has flown a few hundred hours in Microsoft Flight Simulator to join their forums and participate? He's a great guy and probably willing to give pointers to any up and coming pilots, but you can bet they like a place to talk serious shop away from that as well.

Just trying to present some alternative ways of looking at it.

David, this is very interesting. These analogies very much parallel the motivations to create the separate Core list in the first place... to either A) figure out a way to completely restructure the ST Forum to increase S/N ratio for the more veteran, seasoned chaser generation... or B) Keep the Core and the x1 version of the forum in place, with perhaps a more stringent moderation.

The "Core" group was created for a myriad of reasons; one major reason was a growing disconnect with the influx of new "storm chasers" being admitted to post in the Forum; thus an increase in "noise" as seen in the eyes of the more veteran/experienced/educated group of the Forum. It may not be that much "noise" to others. Since I fall in this group, it has been a problem for me, personally. I have a low post count as it is, not really because of professional reasons, but I find a very low percentage of stimulating threads in which to partake in. Most of the threads in the former W&C as well as in TA are fluff to me. Especially the former "TALK" in TA. What Mike P mentioned earlier, using the analogy of different "classes" in high school is fairly accurate. There is a fairly large group of storm chasers that emerged when the internet first took off in the mid 90s... that are becoming more disconnected with the newer generation of storm chasers... several of which that also happen to be avid internet forum posters.

There are so many storm chasers these days in this "new generation", many of which don't even post on the internet, that it is extremely tough to get to know on a somewhat personal/intimate level. This earlier "class" of storm chasers, if you will, were the ones that initiated the push to create a more stringent forum with much more signal and stimulating, thought-provoking posts... even for the veteran chaser of 8+ years like myself who have historically posted accounts/photos on a routine basis to peers since the mid-late 90s.

There *is* a growing disconnect, and this must be recognized as happening, and it will take a little more than x2 to really remedy the issue. There needs to be at least 2 levels of membership (The hardcore *chasers*) and the other newbies/non-chasers/very occasional, new chasers. x2 does not support this, at least at this point. The only thing I see changed is membership rules for only one "level" of membership, which are fairly vague at best. This still allows storm enthusiasts who are not chasers, trolls, etc. to get in and post at free will, increasing the noise.... as seen in the eyes of the more hardcore, veteran, seasoned chasers. Increased noise in their eyes = less interaction, posts, and ultimately visits until being completely turned off due to a lack of interest. This is a *big* reason why more veteran, seasoned, well-known chasers either stop interacting on this forum or never have in the first place. It may be a "privately run" forum, but it is open to public membership, therefore a public forum.

x2 is a start in the right direction, but it's not complete, in my eyes. Thanks,

Mike U

[Robert Dewey]

Mike U. - I think the new rules are trying to fix that problem. That's what the basic argument has been about. I am all for limiting the newbies and non-chasers, or those who can't contribute much. I think Tim is trying to implement a higher standard for accepting applications.

The best bet would probably be to have each applicant write an essay on their meteorological experience or chasing experience... I'm not sure how else it would be handled. I don't think using a persons website would be good, as I personally don't own a website, and never intend to.... I also do not have a met degree - but that doesn't mean I haven't read meteorological text and physics books (I would probably advance quite rapidly through the beginning courses)....

[Bill Tabor]

Well thought out Mike. I think I agree.

[Bill Tabor]

Someone mentioned the new members and having a filter on them because a lot are spammers. SO, I decided to click the newest member link to see what I found. Check it out a spammer:

http://stormtrack.org/forum/profile.php?mo...wprofile&u=3253 (http://stormtrack.org/forum/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=3253)

[Robert Dewey]

Someone mentioned the new members and having a filter on them because a lot are spammers. SO, I decided to click the newest member link to see what I found. Check it out a spammer:

http://stormtrack.org/forum/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=3253

They can't post to the board, Tim V. has to approve the account first. I doubt that one will pass, for some reason :lol:

[Rob_Davis]

Exactly. I click on every new member that shows up, and sure enough, the greatest number of them are spammers. Interestingly, most seem so similar that it looks like they are all the same idiot. You'd think he would have figured out it was futile months ago.

And I always get a kick out of the ones who aren't spammers but didn't read that they had to use their real name to sign up. Some of their "handles" are pretty funny.

[Robert Dewey]

Exactly. I click on every new member that shows up, and sure enough, the greatest number of them are spammers. Interestingly, most seem so similar that it looks like they are all the same idiot. You'd think he would have figured out it was futile months ago.

And I always get a kick out of the ones who aren't spammers but didn't read that they had to use their real name to sign up. Some of their "handles" are pretty funny.

Also... Most of those aren't actually individual spammers - they are bots setup to crawl through PHP forums and enter certain values/information. If it was setup so they could automatically post, you would see every forum bombarded with "Buy this!" and whatever...

[Jason_Politte]

The best bet would probably be to have each applicant write an essay on their meteorological experience or chasing experience... I'm not sure how else it would be handled. I don't think using a persons website would be good, as I personally don't own a website, and never intend to.... I also do not have a met degree - but that doesn't mean I haven't read meteorological text and physics books (I would probably advance quite rapidly through the beginning courses)....

Sure, this applies to new applicants, but what happens with what's occurring presently. Much of what led to the Core being created in the first place still exists, as Mike U. so eloquently stated. While most in this thread have responded responsibly, this thread being started as it was and continuing on as it has is a prime example of that, IMO.

Jason

[Robert Dewey]

Sure, this applies to new applicants, but what happens with what's occurring presently.

I guess just suspend the users who are violating rules? Seems like a viable option to me....

[Mike Umscheid]

Mike U. - I think the new rules are trying to fix that problem. That's what the basic argument has been about. I am all for limiting the newbies and non-chasers, or those who can't contribute much. I think Tim is trying to implement a higher standard for accepting applications. [deletia]

It's certainly a dynamic issue in internet human psychology/communication! Cater to all. That's my vote, and it can easily be done by creating a Usergroup within the forum. This *does not* segregate the community at all. In fact, it provides a better means of communication. A two-fold membership... the basic member, and an "experienced chaser" member (or whatever PC name it should be called).

Where did the FAQ board go? This is *Fantastic* venue for the basic member to post question who may be new to the hobby or is meteoroligcally related. This allows communication between the hard-core chasers and the younger, less experienced, newer audience. The current WeatherLab is too broad of a board. Open this up for general chasing/weather discussion like the former W&C, even for basic membership. But, create a 2nd board similar to this for "advanced chasing discussions" for the experienced/hard-core/seasoned chasers to "talk shop", advanced theory discussions, new chase tactics, etc etc.

This is how I envision the future of StormTrack Forum... a fully interactive community where newbies are welcome to post question and can talk in a more "open" board, yet at the same time, the hard-cores/seasoned people can seek refuge in a more intimate posting environment.

Also, open up Chaser Reports in a board of its own and make it available for all to enjoy and read, even guests. [edit: but posting priveledges only for the "experienced" membership level, sorry for any confusion]

Again, these are my 2c for whatever they are worth. I'd hate to see a group of veteran/seasoned chasers who've been at it for 8+ years become more and more disassociated with Stormtrack, which is what I strongly fear is taking place.

Mike U

[Jason_Politte]

Sure, this applies to new applicants, but what happens with what's occurring presently.

I guess just suspend the users who are violating rules? Seems like a viable option to me....

But that's just it - there's not necessarily any rules violations ongoing. Personally, I think the only way to really get around it would be to restructure the forum with a clean slate, and apply the new application rules to all members instead of having everyone grandfathered in as was done. However, I doubt this will happen.

Jason

[Mike Umscheid]

Sure, this applies to new applicants, but what happens with what's occurring presently.

I guess just suspend the users who are violating rules? Seems like a viable option to me....

But that's just it - there's not necessarily any rules violations ongoing. Personally, I think the only way to really get around it would be to restructure the forum with a clean slate, and apply the new application rules to all members instead of having everyone grandfathered in as was done. However, I doubt this will happen.

Jason

This is where the Usergroups idea comes in. Yeah, it was done before with TA, but do this with more boards and make it more interactive so the more experienced/seasoned guys feel a little more at home and have a forum to go to with less riff-raff, if you will.

Mike U

[Rob_Davis]

The current WeatherLab is too broad of a board. Open this up for general chasing/weather discussion like the former W&C, even for basic membership. But, create a 2nd board similar to this for "advanced chasing discussions" for the experienced/hard-core/seasoned chasers to "talk shop", advanced theory discussions, new chase tactics, etc etc.
I agree that the current W&C forum is already shaping up to be a little too broad. And I agree that it would be helpful to the forum as a whole to have a more limited area for hardcore/advanced discussion. I guess where we might disagree is whether or not it should be hidden from the rest of the community.

I never disagreed with the concept of the old secret forum. I only disagreed with it being secret.

[Jason_Politte]

Sure, this applies to new applicants, but what happens with what's occurring presently.

I guess just suspend the users who are violating rules? Seems like a viable option to me....

But that's just it - there's not necessarily any rules violations ongoing. Personally, I think the only way to really get around it would be to restructure the forum with a clean slate, and apply the new application rules to all members instead of having everyone grandfathered in as was done. However, I doubt this will happen.

Jason

This is where the Usergroups idea comes in. Yeah, it was done before with TA, but do this with more boards and make it more interactive so the more experienced/seasoned guys feel a little more at home and have a forum to go to with less riff-raff, if you will.

Mike U

I do believe you have some good thoughts and ideas here, Mike, but I believe we were also told that a multi-tier system would not be put into place with the restructure of ST.

Jason

[Mike Umscheid]

The current WeatherLab is too broad of a board. Open this up for general chasing/weather discussion like the former W&C, even for basic membership. But, create a 2nd board similar to this for "advanced chasing discussions" for the experienced/hard-core/seasoned chasers to "talk shop", advanced theory discussions, new chase tactics, etc etc.
I agree that the current W&C forum is already shaping up to be a little too broad. And I agree that it would be helpful to the forum as a whole to have a more limited area for hardcore/advanced discussion. I guess where we might disagree is whether or not it should be hidden from the rest of the community.

I never disagreed with the concept of the old secret forum. I only disagreed with it being secret.

Okay, this is fair enough. Make it available for all users to see, but only the 2nd tier user level be able to post. This still solves the "less noise" problem, which is my largest beef within the whole community. Content, Content, Content. This is key. Quality content is a must.... and is what I seek to see more than "a refuge hidden place" in all honesty. The only way about this is restricted posting priveledges in select boards based on whatever Usergroup you are in.

Mike U

[Melissa Moon]

Look, I don't think that anyone should be discriminated from joining Stormtrack. Even the enthusiast. For one, it's hypocritical; we were all mere weather enthusiasts at one point. If a nice php message board like this had been around when I was 17 years old (only 4 years ago!) and I had known about it, I would have wanted to join it and get involved in a heartbeat. I think that if an enthusiast or a new chaser is willing and able to come onto this board and make insightful posts to contribute to the discussions on the forum, then why put a stop to that? How can you even tell who will make an excellent contributing member to the stormtrack community by a membership application alone? There are a handful of really intelligent people out there who may not have any formal chasing experience due to money or life situations, but could offer a headload of insight and knowledge to the forum for others to benefit from. I mean, with this prescreening process, it's almost like you have to build somewhat of a name for yourself in order to be let in, which in my opinion is treading along the fine line of being elitist.

I don't agree with a special forum for only more *experienced* people to post or whatever. In my mind, "mindless"posts (ie ones that are made with no original thought like..."oh I agree with so and so" with no reason behind them) are the only things we can be objective about (because it's easy to see when there is no original thought in a post) but beyond that, the quality of a post is really a subjective thing. What one finds useful, another might think as junk and vice versa. By all means, if someone is using their brain to come up with the post and not just paraphrasing someone else, then I don't see a problem with it at all because it may inspire someone else's mind in some way.

And no, I don't think people who come onto Stormtrack to either never post anything or violate the TOS should be allowed to keep their membership because it is doing nothing positive for the forum. So, if I were the head honcho of Stormtrack and I was put in charge of making these changes, here is what I would do:

I actually model this a bit off of the Australian policy for drivers' licenses.

First, I would not discriminate against anyone who wanted to join (except of course spammers). HOWEVER, the first month or two of each new members' membership would be a provisional one. In that period of time, that person must make a certain number of insightful contributions (say maybe 2 or 3) to a weather/chasing-related topic (in other words, the person must either start a thread or post some sort of reply that shows that the person put original thought and effort into his/her posts). If this critera is not met by the time provisional membership is up, then the person's membership will be cancelled and not upgraded to being a regular member.

Also, with provisional memberships, there would be a no-strike policy on TOS violations; if a person under a provisional membership starts a flame or something to that effect, then his/her membership would be revoked on the spot.

Once a person is upgraded to a regular member, I think a two-strike policy on TOS violations is fair. The first violation would be a downgradement to provisional membership for a set period of time (almost like being on probation again), and of course if the person struck again while under provisional membership, then he/she would be out. If he/she serves out this "probation" successfully, then he/she will earn his/her two strikes back if that makes any sense.

Also regular members who become completely idle on the board and noticeably stop contributing the to the forum for an extended period of time I think should also be downgraded to provisional members where it is compulsory to actively contribute to the forum to sustain membership.

Anyway, that's sort of my rough plan for what I would do.

I think the whole provisional/regular member thing would solve a lot of problems and be a good way of giving everyone who wants to be a part of Stormtrack a fair chance to do so. It will weed out those who join and don't bother posting anything insightful about weather (or don't post anything at all), along with those who come onto the board and create problems. BUT it will keep those who are wanting to be an active, useful member of the community (which is what we want from new members, right?).

I also think that it will help police older members who may start better. If you're a regular on here, and your membership is placed on probation for doing something out of line, it will get your attention more and you'll be much much more careful about what you say/do in the future. Things will then be more pleasant for everyone.

Anyway, I welcome your comments/critiques regarding my idea.

[Jeff Snyder]

Look, I don't think that anyone should be discriminated from joining Stormtrack. Even the enthusiast. For one, it's hypocritical; we were all mere weather enthusiasts at one point. If a nice php message board like this had been around when I was 17 years old (only 4 years ago!) and I had known about it, I would have wanted to join it and get involved in a heartbeat.
Anyway, I welcome your comments/critiques regarding my idea.

Melissa,

If the phpBB version of ST was around when I was 13-15yrs old, I would have loved to join as well. However, I probably wouldn't have been a valuable contributor to the ST community, mainly because I just didn't know too much. Would I, a non-chaser, have expected membership to a storm chasing community? Certainly not! What would I have done (read: what did I do instead)? I searched for answers to all my questions. There are a bunch of excellent resources on the internet (see other thread) from which non-chasers can learn a LOT from. You don't necessarily need to post a very basic question when you can go to Google and find an answer from a credible resource (NWS, universities, etc) in less time than it would take to formulate a good question. It wasn't the easiest of things -- to go searching for answers to my questions -- but I did it (and so did most others pre-phpBB version of Stormtrack). I do think we should bring back the FAQ as a read-only feature of ST, since there are valuable questions/answers in there.

Similar to what David mentioned earlier -- if I were interested in a hobby, yet didn't participate in the hobby, would I EXPECT membership to discussion forum about that hobby? Heck no. It would be nice, but I probably wouldn't have much to contribute at first... Perhaps after learning about the hobby, and practicing the hobby for a bit, I'll have the knowledge to contribute -- THEN I'll be able to contribute positively.

Stormtrack can be a very valuable tool for beginners, don't get me wrong. Let's get the old FAQ cleaned up and perhaps work on the ST frontpage some. As it is now, anyone can still read all Stormtrack discussion (save Bar and Grill). If you don't chase but think it's cool, then please cruise Stormtrack. There are tons of good discussions here. But, if you don't chase, then I'm not sure how you can expect to be a member of a board who's motto is "serving chasers since 1977". As someone else noted, you can always contact members via their websites, etc. Read up, go on a few chases, and apply for membership!

[Simon Brewer]

So who is in charge of the "Storm Chasing License Department", because I just want to know if I have the intelegence to post in this forum, which would also infer that I am an official storm chaser? I want to know if my posts are just ridiculous or if they, as so many other people have stated, "contribute" to the storm chasing "community".

These questions seem rediculous, but they have truth; there seems to be a number of people claiming thier material is worth reading over another regarding weather. And there seems to be a "community" that is weeding-out people, which would imply some people are no better than weeds? I hope I'm not a weed!

And where can I take my "Storm Chaser Test" and become a registered "Storm Chaser"?

Simon Brewer
www.stormgasm.com

[Shane Adams]

As someone else noted, you can always contact members via their websites, etc. Read up, go on a few chases, and apply for membership!

Or you can go somewhere else.

[Glen Romine]

Or you can go somewhere else.

I think on some level Shane is right. Jeff, you could go somewhere else, whereas for Shane and some others, the options are rather limited. Since there are probably fewer than 4 dozen individuals on this board who are

1) hard core chasers and/or mets
2) dissatisfied with the current post quality on ST
3) able to leave their personalities behind in the interest of discussing a common hobby/passion
4) can accept the fact that meeting the above 3 criteria means they are labelled elitist by many on this board

then it is probably more practical for this group to find a new home elsewhere on the web (not at ST, since they are not welcome here by the majority) than to try and influence their minority will on the rest of the populance. ST is a crowded place - and too many rules will clearly just make it uncomfortable for too many.

Glen

[Michael Auker]

I applaud the membership restrictions! There are plenty of other weather boards out there for the enthusiasts and weather weenies. Lets keep this site professional enough so that royalty like SPC and NHC meteorologists continue posting.

[Gabe Garfield]

It's interesting to me that a lot of people here are wanting to defend their "right" to post. To a certain degree, I am in support of this idea. I think that non-chasers and newbies have some valuable things to say. However, if I were still a newbie/non-chaser, I would find it far more valuable to be able to read posts by veteran/experienced chasers than to air my own opinion of something I know very little about.

Like Jeff, when I was younger I was content to simply absorb knowledge from those with more experience. Eventually, I became more experienced and had something to contribute to the community.

I must admit, I don't post on here very often because there are very few threads that interest me. Because of this, I would definitely like to see more participation from veteran/experienced chasers, since I think I would glean a great deal from their knowledge. I would love to see intelligent discussions (even if I weren't allowed to participate) about tornadogenesis theories, or different types of multiple-vortex behavior in tornadoes, etc. I understand that a number of us probably don't care about such subject matter (because they chase for the aesthetic value of storms), but I think that we could all benefit from the knowledge of those who are more experienced.

Gabe

[Geoff Boyle]

I would have to agree with Simon.

I think some novice, but genuine, chasers are going to be expelled because the "Licensing Department" (aka: the bureaucracy) will base their decisions exclusively on the web and post content (pictures, TA discussions, websites, forecast and weather discussion goofs, etc) and the familiarity (chaser gatherings attended) of the Stormtrack membership.

OR

The Administration will contact various members, asking them to "prove" their eligibility as storm chasers.

I find it odd that the people who disapprove of the public licensing idea for all storm chasers, that has found it's way in some ST threads, support that notion for this forum.

[Ben Cotton]

Originally posted by Geoff Boyle
I find it odd that the people who disapprove of the public licensing idea for all storm chasers, that has found it's way in some ST threads, support that notion for this forum.Except that it's different. You don't have to be a member of ST to chase. If the Tims decided to make ST open to only people who had the middle initial "Z" they could do that. By and large, novice chasers only add noise to a forum like this. They can still read and learn, but they don't (generally) have much in the way of substance to contribute. I was on WX-CHASE for almost a year before I started posting, just taking it all in and trying to learn so that when I did start open my mouth I could keep my foot out. (Still struggling with that sometimes). I'm all for the changes that were made. Over time, it may become apparent that this was an overcorrection. Then again, it may become apparent that this was desperately needed.

My advice to everyone is to chill out. Let's stick with this for a while and see what happens. You don't give up on a chase at 4PM, there's no reason to get so worked up about the remodel just yet. Let's see how it goes.


Ben

[Chris DeRosier]

I can't understand if I should even be viewing the boards anymore. I feel a bit insulted by being called a "weather weenie". I've been interested in weather my whole life, growing up in southern MN (lots of activity there!). I moved to northern MN after high school to attend college, and now after school, having a job, a family, and 3 children, I am in no position to hop in my car at the drop of a hat. Not to mention that northern MN isn't exactly the hotbed of severe weather activity. I hope to someday.

I do what I can with my interests and passion for weather- reading this forum, and others, being a Skywarn spotter for several years, and learning. But from what I'm reading here, I can't tell whether or not I should frequent the site. I know the new rules say I can, but reading the discussions here, there are some who believe I "fit" here, and others who think I'm a "weenie".

What I'm saying, I guess, is if I find this site a learning tool, I don't feel it necessary to be labeled a weenie.

[Aaron Kennedy]

I think some novice, but genuine, chasers are going to be expelled because the \"Licensing Department\"

There is no reason to expell "novice chasers" if they do in fact go out and chase.

I can't understand if I should even be viewing the boards anymore. I feel a bit insulted by being called a \"weather weenie\".

Chris, no offense should be taken from being called a weather weenie... I can proudly proclaim myself as one too. I'll just simply state that for weather weenies... better forums exist. ST is geared towards those that actively "track' storms.

What I'm saying, I guess, is if I find this site a learning tool, I don't feel it necessary to be labeled a weenie.

Users can still read forums from the public... there is no reason why the forum wouldn't be a learning tool... even for those who are not members.

Aaron

[fplowman]

One thing i found interesting is i have a 67% rating for E&E. Which of course would preclude me from posting in the new forum "Bar and grill". Im on probationary status and i guess could be expelled from this site at anytime.

This year I chased 9 chases and drove a little over 6k miles. Last year I chased 6 storms and about 4k miles. Im not chasing with tour groups etc.. I am a Storm Chaser.. I have learned alot and have alot more to learn and look forward to that.

I find that people who dont chase though, Some have never chased or have chased once or went on a tour have more access to the board than i do. Only because they dont have 800+ posts. I did engage in political debate, etc. i thought I was participating in the community because thats what the community did when they werent chasing storms.

Strange paradox huh? When people who dont really chase have more rights in my "percieved home" than I do. i am unsure if I am an exception to the rule or not. So goes life though...

My 2c

[Joe Nield]

Originally posted by fplowman
One thing i found interesting is i have a 67% rating for E&E. Which of course would preclude me from posting in the new forum \"Bar and grill\" Im on probationary status and i guess could be expelled from this site at anytime.

This year I chased 9 chases and drove a little over 6k miles. Last year I chased 6 storms and about 4k miles. Im not chasing with tour groups etc.. I am a Storm Chaser.. I have learned alot and have alot more to learn.

I find that people who dont chase though, Some have never chased or have chased once or went on a tour have more access to the board than i do. Only because they dont have 800+ posts. I did engage in political debate, etc. i thought I was participating in the community because thats what the community did when they werent chasing storms.

Strange paradox huh? When people who dont really chase have more rights in my \"percieved home\" than I do. i am unsure if I am an exception to the rule or not. So goes life though...

My 2c

Pretty much. Guess it would have paid to condense responses into one long post. Oh well, not much of interest going on in there anyways.

[fplowman]

I just did the math and I figureed if i watch my P's and Q's after about 1000 posts i can start to maybe post in the socialization area again aka "grill and bar".

Damn its going to be a long winter... lol

SDS on steroids.

[Bobbi Andrzejek]

[By and large, novice chasers only add noise to a forum like this. They can still read and learn, but they don't (generally) have much in the way of substance to contribute.
Ben[/quote]

I'm a novice. I would hate to be excluded from posting when I have questions. I rarely have anything “real” to contribute. I’m a chaser, yes, but I don’t have fancy equipment. I chase within a 200 mile radius of my home. I check the radar before I leave, I bring my weather radio and I chase by watching the storms, not by watching the radar … so I’m no where near a “professional”. But I love it. I live for it.

I look forward to all the discussions during the height of tornado season because, other than my five-year-old son, there are no other weather enthusiasts in my family. I enjoy participating in the discussions, even if it’s vicariously. ST has opened up my world to meet and enjoy others who are passionate about storms. I hope I can still participate. I would really miss it.

[Jeff Snyder]

Originally posted by Bobbi Andrzejek

I'm a novice. I would hate to be excluded from posting when I have questions. I rarely have anything “real” to contribute. I’m a chaser, yes, but I don’t have fancy equipment. I chase within a 200 mile radius of my home. I check the radar before I leave, I bring my weather radio and I chase by watching the storms, not by watching the radar … so I’m no where near a “professional”. But I love it. I live for it.

I look forward to all the discussions during the height of tornado season because, other than my five-year-old son, there are no other weather enthusiasts in my family. I enjoy participating in the discussions, even if it’s vicariously. ST has opened up my world to meet and enjoy others who are passionate about storms. I hope I can still participate. I would really miss it.

Bobbi -- I certainly wouldn't worry about it -- you ARE a chaser afterall. High tech or low tech, you go out in search of storms, so you are a chaser.

Personally, I certainly would NOT say that 'novice chasers' don't have anything to contribute. Novice or experienced, a chaser is a chaser -- we all started as novices at one point or another. My point of contention lies with non-chasers on a chasing forum. Again, as stated a ton of times, anyone can read ST and learn a load beneficial material. Get a couple chasers under your belt, and come join our community!

Disclaimer: The view expressed above is that of my own, not necessarily that of official Stormtrack administrative!

[Carrie Halliday]

Originally posted by Michael Auker
I applaud the membership restrictions! There are plenty of other weather boards out there for the enthusiasts and weather weenies. Lets keep this site professional enough so that royalty like SPC and NHC meteorologists continue posting.

Royalty? Oh my. Most mets I have met do not chase! While they are very helpful (and appreciated) for learning forecasting and the new ways to interpret the weather, most will not meet the new criteria to be here. 'Tis sad. Since I am only a part-time back yard chaser in SE Texas and it has been a less than exciting year...am I on the "soon to be discarded list"? I would like to know what constitutes a "quality post".

Good luck on attaining <60% Fred. I am a 47%er if I remember right. :roll:

This place should get very interesting come Dec-mid March.

[Bryce Stone]

Carrie asked: am I on the \"soon to be discarded list?\"

Tim V. answers in this post, which it seems many people have not read, but which is easy to find in another thread in Information desk:

We are not going to dip a strainer into the userlist to weed out non-chasers based on credentials. That will be done on new applications (and to what extent is still in debate). But as long as a person is a currently a member here, abides by the rules, and respects the slant of the board, they're welcome

Several people have expressed worry about losing their membership, but if you're already a member you have nothing to worry about.

[Tim Gonyo]

Everyone,

Well, I've decided its come to the time where I give my two cents on this subject. I've been wanting to reply for awhile now, but have been holding back, but cannot any longer...

Here is how I see it, and this is a very logical viewpoint:

1) ST was reorganized for a reason. There were problems with the way it was, and it had to be fixed. I applaud Tim for making the changes he did. The forum was turning into chaos.

2) On to the politics and religion viewpoint. Why would you want to discuss something where people already have an established viewpoint? You can argue up 100 pages of posts, but in the end you will see the two sides won't have changed their minds at all. And its not just politics that I see this on, its any topic that turns into a debate. Debating turns into a chaotic environment that pushes people into anger. Its very hard to convince people that their viewpoints aren't right. It's human nature to stand your ground and continue battling. So lets leave politics, religion, and other debates off of this forum. Why can't we engage in friendly conversation about topics (i.e. discussions) in the new Bar and Grill?

3) On to the newbie and "weather weenie" thing. ST has been serving chasers since 1977. Bingo. You all knew this when you first came to this board, you signed up anyway after reading the rules and regulations, and now people are saying that nonchasers and weather weenies should be allowed to have memberships. For one, to be a chaser, you don't have to drive 10,000 miles a year and see 25 tornadoes. There is nowhere on this site proclaiming that. A chaser could be someone who ventures out around his locale pursuing local severe storms. This person would in fact be a "storm chaser". He is pursuing a storm. And its not that hard for a person to attain that chaser "status". Almost every state has at least (1) severe storm per year that is chaseable. There is also nowhere on this board that declares you can't be a member if you are a new chaser, (i.e. newbie). I believe even newbie chasers have information that we can learn from. Everyone has different perspectives, so I am open to hearing from anyone, whether it be a veteran chaser or a newbie. But, all in all, this site should stay catered to storm chasers and not just "weather enthusiasts", since that was the basis for ST originally, and it appears it still remains that way, so we need to let it be.

4) Also, a lot of you are angered by the 60% post ratio in Bar & Grill. Yes, I agree we need a place to talk about topics that don't coincide with storm chasing and weather, but we don't need page after page of debating, politics, and religion. Most people who are 60% and up were the people that would persist in the copius topics debating politics and religion. And if you read the first page of the post, and then go to the last page, you could pretty much assume what would be going on in the end without even reading it. You know what I mean? It's the same senseless babble over and over again. Bar & Grill needs to be used as a off-topic discussion forum, not debate-land. There are the people that are worried on what they will post about in the chasing off-season. There is a lot to post about. (i.e. autumn cold fronts, ice storms, sleet storms, snowstorms, torrential rainfall associated with winter storms, warm fronts that produce winter thunderstorms, cold waves, blizzards, dense fog, etc). And all that stuff can be chased if you want. A storm chaser does not end with thunderstorms and tornadoes. Remember, Webster's definition of a storm is "An atmospheric disturbance manifested in strong winds accompanied by rain, snow, or other precipitation and often by thunder and lightning." So basically, you can chase a lot more, hence being lots of stuff to post about thats weather-related in the off-season.

Well, I believe I've summed it all up pretty well. Who thinks these arguments hold some truth?

-Tim

[Michael Auker]

No offense meant by my using the term "weather weenie", I also am one. I'm not sure I belong on here either; the depth of knowledge displayed by the other members is amazing! However, I'm pursuing a degree in which a major component is meteorology. Maybe someday I can add my two-cents worth.

[Melissa Moon]

Originally posted by Chris DeRosier
I can't understand if I should even be viewing the boards anymore. I feel a bit insulted by being called a \"weather weenie\".

What I'm saying, I guess, is if I find this site a learning tool, I don't feel it necessary to be labeled a weenie.

Chris I think you are taking the term "weather weenie" the wrong way. "Weather weenie" is a term for someone who is merely hardcore into weather. I know scientists at NSSL who have referred to themselves as "weather weenies". The head of the met. department at OU frequently uses the term. So, when someone is calling you a "weather weenie", it's not a bad thing at all. It's kind of like "weather enthusiast" but a bit more ambidextrious because you can be a weather weenie and be a professional in meteorology or a chaser or just an enthusiast. I proudly call myself a "weather weenie".

[David Wolfson]

... Me, Sparticus! I mean... weather weenie! Most of the members of the board have been in one way or another since they said their first two words, "ook! cowd!" Members should bring a little more to the table than just that, is all.

[Rob_Davis]

Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
Chris, no offense should be taken from being called a weather weenie... I can proudly proclaim myself as one too.
Whoa! *light comes on*

I just figured out what Aaron's avatar is all about! :D

[Aaron Kennedy]

lol!!! I never thougt about that. I'll have to add some wx to the background.

Aaron

[Bill Tabor]

Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
lol!!! I never thougt about that. I'll have to add some wx to the background.

Aaron

I suggest having that little "weenie" running in the background with a Wizard of Oz type tornado nipping at his heels.

[Rob_Davis]

Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
lol!!! I never thougt about that. I'll have to add some wx to the background.
Make sure he's running towards the tube, not away! :wink:

[Dave Kaplow]

When I saw the new ST, and read the new rules, my first thought was ”Thank you, ST - you really listened!”, because it appeared that my (and many others) advice had been taken regarding the hidden forum and whether or not it was an appropriate solution to the situation. But I can’t believe we are having flames wars already! Surely it should be obvious that an entirely new ST (this is STx2, after all) needs time to settle down and organize itself? Why immediately complain? For god’s sake, wait a bit and see how the new rules work themselves out. If you’re still dissatisfied after a month or so, then is the time to bring it up for discussion. Come on, the “only chasers” rule is really not that much of a departure from what we had before. Let’s see how it works in action before we complain about it. Immediately posting about how horrible the new rules are, before so much as a single person has been denied entry, this accomplishes very little, IMO. Why get all worked up about a theoretical problem that may not prove to be all that terrible? C’mon, chill out a little... Please?

And that’s all I will say about this for now. Moving on...

I have to say that I like Mike U’s idea for an “advanced concepts” forum. The type of topics he envisions are just the kind of thing I’d like to see more of. But I am going to go out on a limb and make a radical statement: I don’t believe such a forum would need to be limited to a subgroup of ST members. Think about it... Why on earth would a person who doesn’t know much about storms want to post in a forum specifically titled “Advanced Concepts”? The idea would be to keep the level of discourse high enough so that uneducated and inexperienced chasers simply wouldn’t want to post there. Make it clear in the rules that posts asking for explanations of basic terminology will not be tolerated. If you don’t understand the conversation, you have no business jumping in. No explanations of basic concepts would be given in the “advanced” forum, you either understand it or you don’t join the thread, period. Violators get their posting priveledges revoked. With proper moderation such a section would be a great addition to ST. It would provide exactly what the vets have been asking for, without any of the limitations that seem to alienate everybody else. Every member would have access to read all posts, and everybody would initially also have permission to post - but with the knowledge that any post demonstrating a “less than advanced” grasp of the subject matter not only will be deleted from the thread, but will get the poster banned entirely from the forum. I think this would be enough to keep most inexperienced chasers on the sidelines. After all, they can always still post in the regular weather lab forum.

I firmly believe this could work. I definitely see the need for an advanced area. There is just too big a gap between say, a highly technical discussion of the origins of RFD, or an examination of the latest changes to one of the numerical models, and the kind of laid-back and accessible thread typically found in Weather and Chasing/Weather Lab, for instance threads called “best storm of 05" or “weirdest weather experience”. Moving the technical threads to their own forum would increase the S to N ration significantly, and entice more knowledgable people onto the board. I think it should be considered, but without any restrictions other than what I have described. I think the proponents of a closed forum would be very surprised at the results.

Note: I realize that asking for a new forum right now is a violation of my own advice about seing how things work out with the new board before asking for changes. I am posting mainly in response to Mike Umsheid's previous posts, because I believe he has a good point, but is also wrong about the need for restricted access. I should add that I myself would, at least for the moment, likely be mostly a lurker at any "advanced concepts" forum.

[Kevin Scharfenberg]

I've been on the internet for over 10 years, and some things never change. Wide-open forum memberships allowing a wide-open range of topics ALWAYS go through growing pains like this (and many of them don't survive). Many "wild west" boards fracture when a certain number of users get tired of all the flame wars and noise, and they frequently start their own new forum with exclusive memberships and constrained topics, yielding charges of elitism and snobbery by the other folks. And the world goes round and round. To his considerable credit, Tim V. is trying to compromise here, and I wish more people would give it a chance for awhile to see if it works out, but of course whenever there is change some people will be very unhappy. In the end, it's Tim's decision to make.

NOTHING is stopping anyone who doesn't like the rules here from setting up their own board. That goes for people who think there is too much "noise" AND people who want a wide-open membership and no constraint on topics. This is NOT your personal chat board unless you are paying to operate/use this board; Tim is granting you the priviledge and he's decided to take a compromise approach. There are thousands of other boards to discuss religion and politics. There are also places (e.g., chat rooms) to discuss the line of showers crossing Lower Bavaria. This is a board about storm chasing. I'm sure the mods will offer some leeway and if a post is off-topic, just lock it or ask members to bring it back to storm chasing.

The tricky part is judging potential future members and how much "noise" an existing member is contributing. In the latter case, some boards/e-mail groups have standing policies that every member has to post X number/percent of "substantive" posts over a given period to be retained, where the quality is determined by council/committee. Obviously that opens the door for politics and personalities to get involved. Tim has offered a numerical approach (everything not chase-related is noise and goes in the Bar and Grill forum), and I like it because it doesn't discriminate.

As for admitting new members, I can think of quite a few highly experienced chasers who have contributed nothing but noise and garbage to forums. On the other hand, I've seen some really sharp "newbies" who ask good questions and provoke good discussion. There's no good way to get around it without either admitting everyone or hurting a few feelings. If I were to run a board, I'd admit everyone, but have two buttons next to every post. One button would be for other users to report a "noise" post, and another to report an "offensive" post. If X percent of users report a post to be "noise" or "offensive" it would be classified as such, and a user will be suspended if Y percent of their posts are classified as noise/offensive. Essentially this is what the moderators are trying to do but qualitatively instead of quantitatively. We'll see if it works (I hope it does!). I would be okay with trying to admit some people who are just "interested" in storm chasing as long as they are willing to listen more than talk.

Tim has made it clear he wants to clean up the board and get Stormtrack back to its roots - storm chasing. There were not discussions on religion and politics in the old paper version of Stormtrack, and I'm sure many people submitted articles that were rejected for publication, so I think he's made progress. Or at least I'm willing to give it a chance. I would also throw in support for Mike U's idea for an advanced concepts forum.

[Melissa Moon]

Originally posted by Kevin Scharfenberg


As for admitting new members, I can think of quite a few highly experienced chasers who have contributed nothing but noise and garbage to forums. On the other hand, I've seen some really sharp \"newbies\" who ask good questions and provoke good discussion. There's no good way to get around it without either admitting everyone or hurting a few feelings. If I were to run a board, I'd admit everyone, but have two buttons next to every post. One button would be for other users to report a \"noise\" post, and another to report an \"offensive\" post. If X percent of users report a post to be \"noise\" or \"offensive\" it would be classified as such, and a user will be suspended if Y percent of their posts are classified as noise/offensive. Essentially this is what the moderators are trying to do but qualitatively instead of quantitatively. We'll see if it works (I hope it does!). I would be okay with trying to admit some people who are just \"interested\" in storm chasing as long as they are willing to listen more than talk.



I like this idea. I really do feel it's unfair not to give everyone at least a chance, because you never know who the good contributor is going to be out of the sea of applicants. I was actually trying to think of a good way last night to quantify this so that it would be objective, so I really like this idea. The only question is how to quantify as to when it is considered "noise" or "offensive". I'm assuming a certain number of users would have to click it as being noise for it to count? I think it would work as long as the number was high enough to get rid of any personal reasons as to why someone would click it as "noise" or "offensive" (you know, like say Joe Blow is mad at Jim Bim for something and purposely clicks the button to try to get Jim Bim off the board).

As far as the religion and politics thing goes, I can see how the majority of people agree with one another that it is better (or in other words "safer") to ban those subjects because they are indeed sensitive topics. While I agree with Kevin that it ultimately is Tim's board and anything that he says goes, I still don't like the idea of certain topics being banned from the "Bar and Grill" (because essentially that is a board where people can talk about anything they want not being related to storm chasing, and "anything" under normal circumstances would include those 2 topics). Perhaps it is the Libertarian in me speaking when I say that. My philosophy is more like "if you don't like them, ignore them". I know most people disagree with me on that, and I am not going to take any kind of action to change Tim's orders on that (or create any problems for that matter...I'm quite docile about it even though I disagree) but that's just how I feel about it. Yeah, there weren't any articles in the old paper Stormtrack about either of those two topics, but there also weren't any articles about anything else that IS permitted in the "Bar and Grill" thread.

Anyway, enough about that. About Mike's idea; yesterday, I was against it because I thought that it would create problems (you know, someone who feels like they are qualified to post on the board doesn't get selected and then the elitist accusations go out). But I thought about it some more, and I somewhat changed my mind. It would be neat to have some very technical topics reserved for experts only, because I know my meteorological education would benefit from reading it, and others feel the same way. However, I think it would only work without creating some problems if someone could come up with a nice standardized non-biased way of selecting candidates to post on that board that everyone (or most everyone) could respect in order to minimize the chance of politics ruining what could be a good thing.

Finally, I think that the solution to the problems recently occuring with stormtrack is not housecleaning to make the board more "chaser-exclusive" with new members (cause heavin forbid; many chasers are the culprits for noise and flame wars). I know I've said this before, but I think a much more effective solution would be better policing (like, for example, with Kevin's suggested method) that gives everyone a fair chance but then eliminates those who do cause problems.

[Bill Tabor]

I love the idea of an 'Advanced Topics' area. Seems that would keep a lot of folks happy with high quality posts. Somehow this area would have to be screened - not sure how & weather that would be closed - selected membership, or open with strict rules. The buttons for noise and flame may not be an option with the software - not sure.

Perhaps an area should also be included for newbie chasers, or wannabe chasers, or even weather enthusiasts. People will have to hammer all that out.

[nickgrillo]

Originally posted by Bill Tabor
I love the idea of an 'Advanced Topics' area. Seems that would keep a lot of folks happy with high quality posts. Somehow this area would have to be screened - not sure how & weather that would be closed - selected membership, or open with strict rules. The buttons for noise and flame may not be an option with the software - not sure.

Perhaps an area should also be included for newbie chasers, or wannabe chasers, or even weather enthusiasts. People will have to hammer all that out.

Are you talking about an 'Advanced Area' such as the private forums that we were arguing about before the change?

[Dave Kaplow]

Originally posted by nickgrillo+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(nickgrillo)</div><!--QuoteBegin-Bill Tabor
I love the idea of an 'Advanced Topics' area. Seems that would keep a lot of folks happy with high quality posts. Somehow this area would have to be screened - not sure how & weather that would be closed - selected membership, or open with strict rules. The buttons for noise and flame may not be an option with the software - not sure.

Perhaps an area should also be included for newbie chasers, or wannabe chasers, or even weather enthusiasts. People will have to hammer all that out.

Are you talking about an 'Advanced Area' such as the private forums that we were arguing about before the change?[/b]

Sort of. Mike U proposed a closed forum of the kind that was under discussion on the old board. I am proposing a compromise. I believe there is a good argument for an advanced topics forum of some kind, but I think it should initially be more or less open to all, and certainly always open to all for viewing purposes. An elite group clearly isn't going to be popular with the membership as a whole, so I'm thinking we try it initially without the elitism. Look, nobody wants to make themselves look dumb in a public forum. If we have a place clearly marked out for advanced technical discussions, and we work hard to weed out anyone whose posts are of an obvious less-than-advanced nature, I believe the forum could end up being more or less what the vets were asking for. But the forum as I envision it would be self-policing entirely. I like the idea of "noise" and "offensive" buttons that could be used to flag inappropriate posts (in fact I suggested something very similar in my last post on the old board) but mostly I think that the very existence of a clearly marked "advanced topics" area will act to intimidate the inexperienced and keep them away. Keep the discussion at a very high technical level, clearly labeled as advanced, and I believe there will be very little noise. Intense moderation will be necessary at first, perhaps made easier by the aforementioned noise buttons, and problem posters will no doubt have to be banned, but I believe eventually a consistently high quality veteran-oriented forum would emerge, and be appreciated for what it is by everyone here. There is simply no need for elitism. Most of the chasing newcomers here are more than happy to acknowledge their lack of experience. I doubt if anyone will be in any hurry to display their ignorance for all to see by posting in an advanced topics area. Most will respect it, and learn from it. What the non-veteran membership objects to is mainly the idea of some subgroup of self-selected uber-elite chasers being granted special privileges in secret. It was not the "advanced" part that people objected to, it was the forum's hidden and secretive nature. If the advanced area is implemented out in the open as I suggest, I don't believe there will be any hard feelings from anyone. It will draw in true experts that we can all learn from, and would be a real asset to the site.

[Mike Johnston]

Regarding the idea of an "avanced forum"....why not just have a section called "featured articles" and invite any of our more accomplished members to write a well thought out essay or article, much as would be expected of a magazine article? In this manner, it would clearly be 'read-only' - no need for replies, just an opportunity for members to read a feature work from some of the best and the brightest. Once you get into "secret" and "avanced", no doubt those kind of terms begin to sound off-putting to the general membership. So, an area like this wouldn't be a post board at all, it would be a distinctly separate area on the ST site with feature articles - maybe 5 or 6 a month - submitted to ST for publication and then viewable by any member.

To take some of the workload off of the administrator and moderators, perhaps we could establish some kind of editorial committee that would be responsible for selecting the articles each month to be published.

Hopefully, something like this would take us beyond the elites vs. newcomers conundrum. Face it, we do have elites, as does every field. So, rather than arguing incessantly over who shall be in which bushel basket, why not set up something where the elites can shine and others can appreciate and enjoy? Gives an opportunity for those who are more advanced to show their stuff to a wider community, instead of feeling like they need to cordon themselves off.

[Mike Peregrine]

Sorry if any of the following sounds harsh or elitest or anything that anyone may possibly construe as negative to any party on the forum. I'm also sorry if I'm misinterpreting what is being said now ... feeling just a little burned out tonight - anyone else?

Here's the deal ... we DID have an advanced forum where people could post some detailed forecast and targeting information to the PUBLIC. The TA forum had restricted access but we didn't like that so we allowed anyone who asked to be able to post in there. Over the period of a year the TA posters with the track record of highest quality posts left. Some left because the 'advanced quality' forum had some issues. Again, some do not want to be associated with public forums any more. Some just don't have time to keep working up solutions to the chase forecast problem for everyone else to benefit from out there these days without lifting a finger themselves (this is WORK after all, and hardly what chasing is all about). So we made a private room where this minority group could still find a place of their own to enjoy. But this was elitest and wrong and hurtful, so that forum is now also gone in favor of the mass perspective on this issue.

So let me understand this ... now our problem-solving consists of creating a room with restricted access that can be highly moderated to encourage advanced posts? How many sides are there to this fence exactly? Welcome back to square one.

I see Kevin Scharfenberg's perspective here. This forum typically goes through a 'noise crisis' about every two to three years. In the past we have ultimately dealt with it by allowing people to just quietly leave and find another niche group that better suits their interests and needs. How about just doing that again ... Want to know one of the BIGGEST reasons that forum was kept private? Because there are 800 involved parties feeling like they are owed a democratic say in the process and there is simply no way to make everyone happy no matter how hard anyone tries.

Also, Stormtrack has tried copy-driven content in the past with contributors encouraged to write insightful articles for the front page. This also wears on people after a while and the responsibility of proper oversight becomes more of a burden in time. The quality in constantly providing this FREE PUBLIC SERVICE was also very difficult to maintain (there was actually a time when yours truly was about the only one providing front page copy a few years back ... yeah, you can imagine just how exciting THAT was - lol - fortunately for everyone it didn't last long). We found that the majority of people were simply bypassing the front page and coming straight in here anyway, so it was eliminated.

Good news though ... this will go away. Stormtrack should now be left alone to be as it always was. If anyone wants to try something different, they will be able to go out and do just that and stop worrying about all this. Overall I see this as a very good thing because it encourages more ST members to sharpen their skills now and start doing the work themselves if this is something they would like to see. This is your forum - make it what you want. By your own voice, you have made each individual in the entire forum responsible to become an 'advanced poster' - so it's time to get to work and start drumming up some advanced posts. We'll watch curiously to see how long it can last this time - - -

I propose that this thread should now be closed and the subject eliminated. No further amount of brainstorming will somehow make this circular logic somehow find a satisfactory conclusion.

[Rob_Davis]

Originally posted by Mike Peregrine
I propose that this thread should now be closed and the subject eliminated. No further amount of brainstorming will somehow make this circular logic somehow find a satisfactory conclusion.
Satisfactory to whom? Quite a few of us saw perfectly satisfactory solutions within this thread. :?

[Shane Adams]

Originally posted by Mike Peregrine
Some just don't have time to keep working up solutions to the chase forecast problem for everyone else to benefit from out there these days without lifting a finger themselves (this is WORK after all, and hardly what chasing is all about). So we made a private room where this minority group could still find a place of their own to enjoy. But this was elitest and wrong and hurtful, so that forum is now also gone in favor of the mass perspective on this issue.

That's the biggest crock of sh*t I've ever heard Mike. Don't sit there and pretend the Core was formed to "save the precious forecast work of the real chasers". The Core was formed because nothing short of pure meteorology was considered worth their time. The Core was formed because the "rest" of StormTrack wasn't good enough, and that group included a hell of a lot of damn good chasers.

What possible proof is there people were peruisng TA just to steal targets? Where's the dozens of no-name successful chase reports from the exact same locations as the "real chasers"? Better yet - I'd like a list of names of the all the people who stole forecasts off TA instead of creating their own. How would one go about assembling this list? Hmmm, maybe all the people who saw tornadoes but didn't pst a target choice to TA? RUBBISH. I hope you guys get your Core back, and go far far away to share your precious knowledge only within the confines of greatness.

Very interesting how, when the "general population" found out about the Core, they were criticized by the Core for their reaction - anger, hurt, mistrust. yet when the Core was taken away, it seems some of its members reacted much the same way - but say it's justified. This is consistent with some of the attitudes I saw on the inside of Core. As long as you're getting YOUR way, it's all good and diplomatic. But God forbid the Chosen not get what they want.

No hard feelings to any of the moderators for whatever consequences this post brings me. They're just doing their job, as I just broke about a dozen TOS rules. I fully understand. But if I am to be exiled, my exit was a grand one.

[Lisa Wadlow]

I've kept quiet on this "new" ST forum reorganization but now I have to speak. I echo everything Shane just said and everything Thomas Loades said earlier in his "One last bit of reorganizing" thread. I am not leaving ST (at least not right now) but I am already missing the fellowship I had with many great people on this site. :cry: :cry: I hope someone starts a site for all of those who preferred the "old" ST. Last year the site was great. It has gone downhill. I still come here because there really aren't any other weather forums of higher quality. Now there's nothing but division (the self-appointed elites not wanting to fellowship with us newbies (or lowlifes as they consider us). I imagine most of the kind and interesting members will leave the forum now and it will simply be those who are trying to one-up another on who's the best and who bagged the most twisters while they talk about how they're Masters of the Universe. The conceit, unkindness, and selfishness will drive a lot of people away. I'm saddened for the site and will miss talking with many people I've come to know and care about over the past year.

[Carrie Halliday]

Originally posted by Shane Adams+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Shane Adams)</div><!--QuoteBegin-Mike Peregrine
Some just don't have time to keep working up solutions to the chase forecast problem for everyone else to benefit from out there these days without lifting a finger themselves (this is WORK after all, and hardly what chasing is all about). So we made a private room where this minority group could still find a place of their own to enjoy. But this was elitest and wrong and hurtful, so that forum is now also gone in favor of the mass perspective on this issue.

That's the biggest crock of sh*t I've ever heard Mike. Don't sit there and pretend the Core was formed to "save the precious forecast work of the real chasers". The Core was formed because nothing short of pure meteorology was considered worth their time. The Core was formed because the "rest" of StormTrack wasn't good enough, and that group included a hell of a lot of damn good chasers.

What possible proof is there people were peruisng TA just to steal targets? Where's the dozens of no-name successful chase reports from the exact same locations as the "real chasers"? Better yet - I'd like a list of names of the all the people who stole forecasts off TA instead of creating their own. How would one go about assembling this list? Hmmm, maybe all the people who saw tornadoes but didn't pst a target choice to TA? RUBBISH. I hope you guys get your Core back, and go far far away to share your precious knowledge only within the confines of greatness.

Very interesting how, when the "general population" found out about the Core, they were criticized by the Core for their reaction - anger, hurt, mistrust. yet when the Core was taken away, it seems some of its members reacted much the same way - but say it's justified. This is consistent with some of the attitudes I saw on the inside of Core. As long as you're getting YOUR way, it's all good and diplomatic. But God forbid the Chosen not get what they want.

No hard feelings to any of the moderators for whatever consequences this post brings me. They're just doing their job, as I just broke about a dozen TOS rules. I fully understand. But if I am to be exiled, my exit was a grand one.[/b]

**applause**

I was waiting for someone to have the cojones to say what they really feel. Shane was first, waiting to see what rebuttal he gets.
Frankly, all this talk of elite members and such takes me back to high school. I didn't partake then, nor will I now. But, it seems I don't have to worry about that as I am not part of the "inner circle".

I suspected that there was secret space for a select few, so now several want to purge the unwanted who do not meet the level of the chosen few so they can have their own personal forum? Last I heard (before the current change), Tim V. had folks turn in applications and a paper on what their background was in weather, and approved those that met his criteria. To me, that says that some didn't agree with Tim's decisions. Doubting the more-than-capable Admin? That is harsh!

I also am an original member of this forum, carried over from the old one. I think I am among the original 10 here. Should there be a secret association for this? Of course not, just like there should not be one for anyone else. Other measures could be taken, like pre approval to certain forums for posting privledges. There has to be a better answer than what is going on now.

[Robert Dewey]

Originally posted by Shane Adams+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Shane Adams)</div>