New poll regarding possible Target Area changes

[Tim Vasquez]

In the poll we ran a couple of weeks ago regarding Target Area changes for 2009, there's been some sentiment expressed to keep things the way they are. I figured it would be prudent to re-run the poll and include "keep it the same" as an option.

The reason this issue has come up is because there's been a steady trickle of complaints over the past year that the rules are too confusing, which results in a steady trickle of Target Area violations and warnings. My philosophy is keeping rules as simple as possible, so I tend to scrutinize anything that might simplify Target Area. On the same token I have mixed feelings about chase information being split into 4 different threads. TTere's often some overlap with nowcasts and forecasts, and most troubling is the way we have REPORTS set up where people are not allowed to ask questions about a chase report without starting a completely new thread.

Ultimately I think it's best if the people who read + write in Target Area have the final say. We'll probably be going with prevailing user preference on this unless there's a close tie.

On another note, this is my first post in about 2 weeks, as I was intensely tied up with book writing and some other projects, so if I haven't replied or addressed some issues here in a timely manner I apologize.

Tim

 

[Adam Lucio]

Keep them the same. The rules aren't hard. If you can read English and learn to tie your shoes you should be able to post without violating the rules. If someone does violate the rules and gets an infraction [hell I did 2 years ago] I don't see how its so hard to learn from that mistake and not do it again.

 

[Dustin Wilcox]

It really seems pretty irrelevant when the rules are not strongly enforced anyway....

 

[Brandon Sullivan]

It really seems pretty irrelevant when the rules are not strongly enforced anyway....

We try to enforce them as best as possible.. And reported posts from you guys are great, to let us know quickly what to take care of..

It just gets hard to juggle all the stormtrack infractions to give out, from the instructions that people arent reading, when we have a daily life to attend to.


But again.. We do try to keep things professional and top caliber.

 

[Dustin Wilcox]

We try to enforce them as best as possible..

Given the number of posts anymore, I can't imagine being a moderator here, the 3/23 forecast went up and what, was is like 30 hours later and it was damn near 10 pages. They better either get more moderators, cut back on memberships, or start paying you guys a salary...

 

[Chad Cowan]

Two threads (before/during & after) may seem more logical than the current four, but the best part of the current system is the REPORTS thread which keeps us from weeding through all of the noise to find the real meat of this site. As much as I love discussing what happened on chase days, we need to keep real chaser reports in its own thread with heavy moderation. "i seen this lightening out my porch, why didnt it drop a tarnader." is not why people come to this site. I vote for not turning Stormtrack into a weather enthusiast site (anymore than it is. . .) and keeping the current system. Otherwise, I think Jason Boggs is going to make a lot of money selling his t-shirt idea.

 

[Derek Weston]

I usually don't like dividing up traffic if I don't have to, but I really like the way you folks have things currently. A vote to stay as is.

 

[J West]

I realize I haven't participated much the last couple years, but I like it that the target area got broke up into sections. It keeps all the comments from running together and it generally reads better. Keep it the way it is.

My $.02

Jim

 

[Robert Edmonds]

I voted keep it the same... but how was it before this current system? I vaguely remember it changing sometime ago, but people tell me I have the worst memory.

 

[Tim Vasquez]

Looking at the poll results (and barring a sudden change) it's likely we'll be keeping the current scheme. I may adjust our Target Area rules to simplify things for new posters, and if we have any problems with noise and riffraff we may look at restricting posting access in that area, similar to what we did a few years ago.

Also on April 1 (or approximately April 1), Target Area will be promoted to the top of the front page forum list as we do every spring.

Tim

 

[Jim Saueressig]

Hopefully you will consider making it member only viewing again for the season as there was already a day this year during a minor event that there were so many non registered members viewing that the site was inaccessible.

 

[Gerrit Gulden]

I agree with Jim, I was one of those that was trying to access the reports and the site was down. It was a major inconvenience. Keeping it member only is a great idea.

 

[Danny Neal]

Perhaps an option where REPORTS would have to get approval from the MOD team or ADMIN before they actually show up on the site? Send it in and have a message saying "Your message will be displayed after it is approved by the MOD team etc etc"


You hate it to come to that, but IMO that is one way to cut down on some of the clutter and bogus things people say. If you don't have the manpower, add it. There are probably over 1000 or 1500 users on ST and 3-4 MOD's (maybe more maybe less) It isn't that unreasonable to add a couple more MOD's even assigning different people to specific sections so they only have to moderate the TA or the B&G or the beginner weather forum. (Just brainstorming here and sorry for going slightly off topic)

 

[Mikey Gribble]

A Forecast thread should be allowed to transition into a Now thread as the event begins to unfold IMO. I don't know why you wouldn't do it this way. There's no reason for two seperate threads.

On the Reports and questions about reports threads I think those need to remain seperate. I like to be able to scroll through and see everybody's reports from that day. If there were questions scattered throughout the reports it would probably annoy me. I would rather any questions be posted in a seperate thread.

So IMO there needs to be 3 categories instead of 4.