• After witnessing the continued decrease of involvement in the SpotterNetwork staff in serving SN members with troubleshooting issues recently, I have unilaterally decided to terminate the relationship between SpotterNetwork's support and Stormtrack. I have witnessed multiple users unable to receive support weeks after initiating help threads on the forum. I find this lack of response from SpotterNetwork officials disappointing and a failure to hold up their end of the agreement that was made years ago, before I took over management of this site. In my opinion, having Stormtrack users sit and wait for so long to receive help on SpotterNetwork issues on the Stormtrack forums reflects poorly not only on SpotterNetwork, but on Stormtrack and (by association) me as well. Since the issue has not been satisfactorily addressed, I no longer wish for the Stormtrack forum to be associated with SpotterNetwork.

    I apologize to those who continue to have issues with the service and continue to see their issues left unaddressed. Please understand that the connection between ST and SN was put in place long before I had any say over it. But now that I am the "captain of this ship," it is within my right (nay, duty) to make adjustments as I see necessary. Ending this relationship is such an adjustment.

    For those who continue to need help, I recommend navigating a web browswer to SpotterNetwork's About page, and seeking the individuals listed on that page for all further inquiries about SpotterNetwork.

    From this moment forward, the SpotterNetwork sub-forum has been hidden/deleted and there will be no assurance that any SpotterNetwork issues brought up in any of Stormtrack's other sub-forums will be addressed. Do not rely on Stormtrack for help with SpotterNetwork issues.

    Sincerely, Jeff D.

NWS melts into NOAA?

The people in Washington obviously have nothing better to do... How many meteorologists could they hire for the money it takes for a redesign/implementation management like this?

-John
 
Heard on the ML forum that this is more to get NOAA's name in the public eye and influencing Congress for more funding, it won't impact any operations or local office use of NWS vs NOAA name.
 
I'm on the 50 yard line about it, because, yes it can result in more funding, but at the same time, it may result in less funding because they are now just 1 large organization.

For now, I'm going to keep an open mind on the "Merger", but I agree with Terry, if that's the new banner, it sucks and they should let the stormchasers design it.

Willie
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I kinda wish they would standardize the location of the links in the menus that are common to all of them. The link to the AFD for instance is in a different place on nearly all of them. I like seeing some things that show the individual offices touch, but things that are common between then need some continuity. That's just coming from a web designer (and user) viewpoint.
 
David,

Here's your one-stop-shop for EVERY text product that the NWS issues, with 50 versions or 7 days available, whichever comes first.

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/product_types.php

Regarding the graphical layout of the new pages, be sure to use the feedback form on the mentioned page above to let the officials know your feelings.
 
From this article I can't decide if they have too much money, or too little.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is spending up to $4 million to publicize a 200th anniversary celebration, said Bill Proenza, who heads the hurricane center, part of the National Weather Service, which is a NOAA agency. At the same time, it has cut $700,000 from hurricane research.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070517/ap_on_sc/hurricane_conference_1
 
If NOAA wants to publicize itself on its components' websites, why not just add a sleek and slender baner across the top of the page with links to other agencies under NOAA, and leave the rest of the page as is? That way, NOAA advertises itself, and doesn't infringe on the image of its component agencies. But that would be the simple and reasonable solution, which a bureaucrat would never think of. ;)
 
Back
Top