Open letter to Spotter Network

[Ryan McGinnis]

Once again, ST has proven that rational discussions can't take place without people getting emotional or snarky, or bringing arguments to the table that are not truly relevant or have been discussed up and down before. If no one is going to behave, I suggest we just lock this thread. Of course, that's just my opinion, and I'm sure my supporters will thank me, and my detractors will thank the first opposing opinion in a stunning display of the thanking system's intended use

I dunno, the discussion doesn't seem too crazy in this thread. While it may not be so in your case, I would submit that *usually* when people write open letters to individuals in a public forum or when they publicly ask to be removed from some service (or publicly quit a forum, or say "I'm through with the internet forever!",) they're looking for a sympathetic reaction. You may not have entirely received the reaction that you were expecting, but that's no reason to lock the thread. One of the reasons that I asked for additional information is that you didn't really provide much in your original post aside from the fact that you were really passionately upset; you may as well have been writing to General Electric or your landlord. It seemed less like you wanted a real discussion about the merits of your situation and just wanted a sympathetic pile-on.

While you've made some interesting points about privacy and data security, try to remember that you voluntarily signed up for a service that publicly publishes your positional data for the entire world to see. A data breach requires an implied sense of privacy; Spotter Network is the antithesis of privacy as you are voluntarily offering up positional data for public consumption. That's the entire point of the application. Additionally, you have to opt-in to publishing such data by running the Spotter Network program on your computer and asking it to listen to your GPS unit and you can stop reporting such data at any time by either turning the program off or telling the program to stop reporting positional data. Every time you turn on Spotter Network and tell it to listen to your GPS feed, you are in essence saying "I want anyone in the world to know exactly where I am, where I've been at precise times, and how fast I'm going and was going." This is common sense. I think this is why some are having a hard time feeling outraged for you; in essence, you are saying (to borrow a line from Casablanca) that you are shocked to find that positional data is being reported in here. It's either faux-outrage or it's outrage based on rather incredible misunderstanding of what Spotter Network is and what kind of data it collects and provides to the world.

 

[Rob H]

<words>

But I didn't start the thread... I think you have me confused for someone else

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

But I didn't start the thread... I think you have me confused for someone else

Ah, drat, you are correct! My comments about how the thread was started, the implied need for sympathetic outrage, and the inability to understand what Spotter Network is for are directed at Wes, not you.

I guess this entire topic just baffles me. Much of the passionate outrage I've seen in this thread and others I've had a hard time registering as genuine; it seems like one would have to be incredibly willfully ignorant to not realize that a full-time public-facing geo-locational reporting service isn't "private". Combine that with the fact that this started in a private forum and was rather perplexingly re-started as an open letter in a publicly-indexed forum (along with a call to arms on Facebook), and it starts to feel like people finding pretenses to re-ignite old rivalries. Of course, I have no idea (I'm pretty ignorant of past chaser drama), but if people were thinking logically this topic wouldn't exist.

 

[Rob H]

Ah, drat, you are correct! My comments about how the thread was started, the implied need for sympathetic outrage, and the inability to understand what Spotter Network is for are directed at Wes, not you.

I guess this entire topic just baffles me. Much of the passionate outrage I've seen in this thread and others I've had a hard time registering as genuine; it seems like one would have to be incredibly willfully ignorant to not realize that a full-time public-facing geo-locational reporting service isn't "private". Combine that with the fact that this started in a private forum and was rather perplexingly re-started as an open letter in a publicly-indexed forum (along with a call to arms on Facebook), and it starts to feel like people finding pretenses to re-ignite old rivalries. Of course, I have no idea (I'm pretty ignorant of past chaser drama), but if people were thinking logically this topic wouldn't exist.

The only way you can win is by not playing the game I guess - that goes for posting in this thread and sharing your information on the Internet.

I don't think people realize how much of their data is floating around on the Internet, and to see a proof of concept like this was eye-opening for some. Keep in mind that this discussion has been carried on in emails, phone calls, on Facebook, in ST chat, in ST private messages, two threads on ST, and one thread on SN - so there has been some build up to this point.

Let me ask an honest, albeit hypothetical question: how would any of you feel if I harvested SN data and sold it to marketers or worked as an insurance adjuster and found some way to gain from your information? The privacy policy and the ToU make it sound like the data is primarily intended only for NWS/EMS/etc. use and due to implementation limitations the feed ended up being public. Where is the line drawn? Why should it even be an issue if I just want to report a tornado that's about to hit a town?

If the initial response from SN had been more open, I honestly don't think this issue would have gotten as far as it has. This whole issue could have been as simple as "This is kind of a a concern, what can be done" and "I'll look into it, thanks for the feedback", but it didn't play out that way for whatever reason.

Btw, having a call to arms about privacy issues on Facebook is irony of the highest degree

 

[Darren Addy]

But I didn't start the thread... I think you have me confused for someone else

Yeah. You have him confused with the guy who started this thread. Completely different forum, topic, and poster. Well, forum anyway.

 

[Keith Wilson]

I am not and never have been a member of SN for numerous reasons which I won't go into, but this has been an interesting thread/arguement.

From my POV, if you put your PII out there for anybody to see, you should expect somebody to figure out a way to use it to benefit them (though not necessarily intending to use it against you).
But if ISU knew that the speed information was skewed, it should never have been made public in the first place and SN probably should have been more pro-active rather than waiting until everything blew up.

I'm not taking sides and don't mean to step on any toes, just looking at it from afar with a truly unbiased POV. Niether side can point to the other and say, "It's all your fault!"

Besides, I'm more concerned whether your attention is on the road than how fast you are going.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

Let me ask an honest, albeit hypothetical question: how would any of you feel if I harvested SN data and sold it to marketers or worked as an insurance adjuster and found some way to gain from your information?

I'd be annoyed with you, though not with SN -- and frankly, I use spotter network under the (correct) assumption that the data is publicly available. This may already be happening, for all you know. It's probably safest that you assume that it is.

There may be people who use SN to stalk others. If there isn't now, I'm sure sooner or later there will be. Again, you use SN based upon your own tolerance for risk but fully understanding that ANYONE can see the geolocational data.

The privacy policy and the ToU make it sound like the data is primarily intended only for NWS/EMS/etc. use and due to implementation limitations the feed ended up being public. Where is the line drawn? Why should it even be an issue if I just want to report a tornado that's about to hit a town?

The feed is public; that's no secret. You can view it on a big map on the web, for Pete's sake.

SN is not the only (or even most likely) place your insurance company would discover that you like to chase storms. Much more likely they would discover this by Googling your name and coming across forums that you post on related to storm chasing. The truth is that they don't spend a lot of time researching these kinds of things, but if they did, it's not exactly that hard to divine what it is that we do.

Lastly, if you don't want to constantly show geolocation data, don't. It's quite possible to run SN only at the exact moment you want to make a report, then switch it off right after. That would provide your location for the moment of the report only, with no long-term tracking that would allow speed information to be gathered.

 

[Rob H]

Lastly, if you don't want to constantly show geolocation data, don't. It's quite possible to run SN only at the exact moment you want to make a report, then switch it off right after. That would provide your location for the moment of the report only, with no long-term tracking that would allow speed information to be gathered.

That's a good suggestion, and what I may end up doing at least in the short term. Tyler did mention that they have algorithms that check your GPS "trail" to verify that you actually are where you say you are and that may end up causing problems. It's also something I really don't want to mess around with when a tornado is on the ground. But it's still a good suggestion, regardless.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

That's a good suggestion, and what I may end up doing at least in the short term. Tyler did mention that they have algorithms that check your GPS "trail" to verify that you actually are where you say you are and that may end up causing problems. It's also something I really don't want to mess around with when a tornado is on the ground. But it's still a good suggestion, regardless.

I'm guessing those algorithms only exist to red-flag when someone is falsifying locational data in conjunction with filing reports. That is, if your positional data indicates that you are in Hays, Kansas at 3PM and Oklahoma City at 3:30PM and then you file a wedge report in Minneapolis at 5PM, your report is flagged as being suspicious. If your calculated average velocity exceeds 1,000 mph, you'd either better be chasing in a Superhornet or you have some 'splaining to do. Since you'd be turning SN on and off and reporting accurate positions, this shouldn't trip any cheating algorithms, unless you board a plane or something between reports.

It sounds silly, but people actually do falsify positional data, and not just kooks who want to troll the NWS with false reports. There are at least a couple higher-profile chasers out there who intentionally report themselves traveling in directions they're not traveling in order to throw tag-a-longs off of their trail.

 

[Lanny Dean]

I do not believe that anyone is arguing the issue "if something like this would hold up in a court of law", although I can't speak for everyone, my problem is that I simply don't want my information made available to anyone and everyone and in letting Tyler know I, as well as everyone else was met with "if you don't like it, don't use it"......Ok, that's pretty simple....I won't be using it anymore. This includes Allsion House feeds. Simple as that. But just like any other consumer I will suggest to everyone that I know that they not use any of his products as well.

Since Tyler is a member in good standing here and one who promotes his product regularly, it stands to reason why this thread was started. I agree that it needed to be started and although some (who hold an authoritive position here) have claimed that this thread was for nothing more than shame, I totally disagree. If someone takes advantage of me in any fashion, or maybe owes me money and won't respond to me or is rude to me in only giving me a half ass reason, if he is a memeber here I have no problem coming and calling on him. If he is not a member I will still inform everyone of his actions simply with the hopes that they are not duped into the same situation I was. I am not flaming him, I am simply giving people information and my thoughts on the matter so that they may be able to make an informed decision if and when they need to to.

 

[Wes Carter]

I don't regret posting my desire to leave Spotter Network, but I do regret where I chose to do it. I think Ryan McGinnis, Patrick Marsh, and RDale have a valid point there. And for the record, Patrick Marsh never threatened an infraction or thread removal. I am the one that brought that up because I was afraid that I had created some unnecessary noise in the forum by bringing something out of the Bar and Grill. I think it is a valid issue that I should have handled with more finesse than I did. In the original thread in the Bar and Grill there were people that felt that thread was hijacked by this issue and it needed to be in its own thread. Also, I have never joined the Spotter Network forums so I could not post there. At the time posting in the Spotter forum seemed like the logical place.

The thread that started this was about a Youtube video of a driver who videotaped himself allegedly doing 195MPH and being arrested for the video. It morphed into a discussion about Iowa State University's chaser speed application. Several people expressed concerns about having their Spotter Network data being used that way. Of course, different people expressed their concern in different ways, but for the most part it was civil. The speed data that Iowa State provided was erroneous to say the least. It showed a bar graph of the chaser's speed. My graph showed that on almost every chase I did close to 120MPH. I know that's wrong, because I don't drive like that. I don't do more than 80 on the freeway, much less on 2 lane roads. And I don't think I ever had Spotter Network running while on freeways. I was not freaking out over the data, I was slightly concerned and a bit amused at how inaccurate my data was.

What concerned me more than anything was Tyler Allison's attitude towards people who had a legitimate concern. Rather than addressing their concerns in an intelligent and courteous manner, he chose to tell us that we were spreading and/or falling victim to FUD, there was nothing he could do about it, and if we don't like it we should not be using Spotter Network. That was the gist of a series of rather snide remarks directed at everyone with a concern.

I chose to follow Tyler Allison's advice and stop using Spotter Network not for the Iowa State speed application, but because of Tyler Allison's attitude towards people with a concern, legitimate or not. I thought that if that is how he chooses to handle this issue, then it will likely represent how he will handle future issues. I don't want to deal with that when something arises that I have a concern with, so I felt it was best for me to leave now.

Spotter Network is a good idea in my opinion, and could be a great thing. I know that some people have put a lot of effort into the software, testing, and coordinating with the National Weather Service. I know that chasers are not paying customers of the service, but by the same token we are also providing them a service by using their network to make reports. We should be treating one another with mutual respect. If the founder of Spotter Network does not want to treat the chasers that are the core of his application with respect, half the equation is lost.

Mr. Allison has an opportunity to change that, and I hope he does. I really would like to see this project succeed. With the proliferation of smart phones I think that they have the chance to advance storm reporting quite a bit. I would hate to see it undermined by poor PR with the chasers and spotters. We still have other means of making reports. Spotter Network still needs chasers to work with them more than chasers need Spotter Network in my opinion.

 

[Brandon Jenkins]

I think everyone gets it. Can we give this a rest and at least give Tyler the opportunity to respond again before everyone continues biting each others heads off? So far we've established the following:

Lanny got mad, others got mad, others defended Tyler and are now mad, pretty much EVERYONE is now mad about something. Did I miss anything?

 

[Nick Nolte]

I think everyone gets it. Can we give this a rest and at least give Tyler the opportunity to respond again before everyone continues biting each others heads off? So far we've established the following:

Lanny got mad, others got mad, others defended Tyler and are now mad, pretty much EVERYONE is now mad about something. Did I miss anything?

It's December on the Stormtrack forums?

 

[Robert Dewey]

I don't regret posting my desire to leave Spotter Network, but I do regret where I chose to do it. I think Ryan McGinnis, Patrick Marsh, and RDale have a valid point there.

I too see it from both sides. I think Tyler made an obviously bad call with his choice of words and attitude. However, he's not the only one... I can point out one or two individuals in this thread who definitely need an attitude adjustment.

 

[Jeff Smith]

I think everyone gets it. Can we give this a rest and at least give Tyler the opportunity to respond again before everyone continues biting each others heads off? So far we've established the following:

Lanny got mad, others got mad, others defended Tyler and are now mad, pretty much EVERYONE is now mad about something. Did I miss anything?

With all due respect Brandon, we all know what Tyler's responses have been so far, so waiting for his response won't help. I agree with others that have stated maybe it is time for a little competition. As for me, I'll just go back to the most reliable mode of reporting via HAM radio.

 

[Lanny Dean]

With all due respect Brandon, we all know what Tyler's responses have been so far, so waiting for his response won't help. I agree with others that have stated maybe it is time for a little competition. As for me, I'll just go back to the most reliable mode of reporting via HAM radio.

Ham Radio, a wet map, covered with KFC drip, NOAA weather radio and its all good baby! Living the dream man!

 

[Tyler Allison]

First off...let me say that I apologize for my snarky responses. Regardless of the nature of the attacks I should not have responded in kind. That will teach me to hold my tongue when I'm in a sour mood and using the small screen of the iPhone.

If you will allow me to elaborate on the situation maybe folks can look past my poorly timed snarkiness and see my point of view.

The Spotter Network was originally designed to provide latitude and longitude and a "callsign" for a particular person. I used "callsign" in the original version of the Spotter Network because I felt the full name of a person, associated with a position was crossing the line of personal information...even if the person had specifically agreed to allow it, as anyone who is a member of the Spotter Network has done. In fact the full name was part of the "private information" section of our website at one time. It was the decision of the advisory committee in 2009(?), at the request of the public safety community, to remove the callsign and replace it with a full name because the end user (eg: NWS, EMA, etc) were unwilling to trust a report from "hotstuff24" even if the SN vouched for their training. Many members of the chaser community objected at the time, but it was deemed a necessary change in light of the reluctance of the public safety community to trust the reports. I thought long and hard about it, even argued against it with several members of the advisory committee on it, but in the end...it seemed a reasonable request with only a minor inconvenience. I stand by that decision, even though I disagreed at the time. Some people will view this as crossing the line of publishing "private information", but it is a _requirement_ of participating with the public safety community. You can not work anonymously with them.

The SN has always been forth coming with the information we release to the general public. It is detailed, warned about and even separated from the information we consider to be "private information". There is an entire section where members can choose what is released and what is not to various groups of people. The _ONLY_ thing we require of a member is their name, their lat/lon and their email address. Except for the lat/lon part, it is exactly the requirements of Storm Track and none find that over bearing who join StormTrack.

Now we come to the lat/lon portion of the issue.

Your lat/lon is crucial to the Spotter Network, otherwise the solution is no better than eSpotter or ham radio or dialing 911 or the local NWS office and thus serves no real purpose for existing if it is not collected and provided to anyone who asks. It is the fact that the lat/lon is provided which makes the Spotter Network powerful. When that lat/lon is associated with a trusted individual (and trusted is obtained by use of a real name, as much as I disagree with that notion) it short circuits the mistrust, the triple checking and the delay in providing reports to the people who most need it.

It is my fervent belief that the combination of lat/lon and first name _DOES_ constitute personal information in the traditional definition. But equally so, electing to provide that information for the greater good no longer makes that information "personal" in nature. The fact that you object to how someone uses the information you have provided to them, is not one of disclosure of private information. Taken out of context, looked at singularly, and devoid of how the information was collected and authorized, _YES_ it would constitute a breach of private information. But explicit approval to provide that information to the general public was granted.

Let me rectify what seems to be some serious jumps of assumption, that I will admit were not helped by my snarky responses.

The Spotter Network did not authorize, condone, partner with, approve of or otherwise induce the IEM to develop the "ground speed estimator" tool for public use. I was contacted several weeks ago and given a "heads up" that the tool had been developed. As a data nerd, I found the tool intriguing on an intellectual level and I will admit I looked passed the potential issue of privacy when I was told of it. I had developed something similar and found the tool useful for identifying people within our weather community that were submitting false reports or faking their position information in violation of the SN ToS. I looked passed the idea of some one being "called out" for excessive speed because I am intimate with the data involved and know it to be _WILDLY_ inaccurate for such use. The belief that such information could be used for anything other than research purposes is absurd. I still believe this to be the case and thus many of my snarky comments were in response to people who I believed to have no understanding of the data itself, the value such a tool can be and exaggerating the risk (FUD) involved in publishing it. _YES_, I do understand the concerns. I simply disagree that they are valid. Unfortunately, my snarky remarks did not convey this belief and were more "fanning the flame" than respectfully disagreeing. Again, I apologize for my approach.

In final communications with the IEM on this topic many weeks ago, I cautioned that publishing full name, though in the public feed and thus not technically private information could cause a backlash of the community. I requested that the IEM modify the full name to be the public id. It serves little purpose in hiding the true name of the person since both items are within the public feed itself. However, it would make identifying the particular person slightly more difficult than a google search. The IEM decided not to change the page and I did not object. Some will view my not objecting as approval of the use and I am not going to argue semantics. From the lens of what I describe above, it seemed an interesting idea...had potential benefit to the community..and posed little risk. In a community of over 15,000 members, there are bound to be several...maybe even many...who disagree with that belief.

24 hours ago (roughly) I once again asked the IEM to remove the full name from their website and use the public id. In the decision of the IEM, they removed the website instead. It is my understanding that the reason it was made available because someone _WITHIN_ the community might find it useful. It was _NOT_ intended to out speeding drivers or some how shine a light on reckless driving. I suspect the IEM, having intimate knowledge of the data after developing the tool, knew such use was inappropriate and discounted the value in attempting to do so.

Now to my snarky remarks....

I've already said I apologize and I'm man enough to say it again. I apologize. My detailed understanding of how the system works and the backdrop of what has transpired outside the view of Spotter Network members colors my view of the situation. With out that information, others will draw a different conclusion of the situation. Instead of focusing on the objections of Spotter Network members, I focused on what I perceived to be personal attacks against me from people I knew did not understand the full details of what they were objecting to. Combined with the under tone that I did not care about the information that has been entrusted to me and purposely was placing people at risk (at one point being called out for being potentially an accessory to murder) I responded instinctively. I don't take kindly to people assuming I have no ethics.

My response of "don't like it leave" stems from the core value of the Spotter Network I've outlined above. Removing the full name and lat/lon from the public feed is _NOT_ possible. Therefor, the only recourse to stop that information from being made public is to not provide it to the SN in the first place.

This does not excuse my snarky remarks, but hopefully you can understand why they were made. Again, I apologize for making them.

Lastly, let's all be clear on this one point. There is _NOTHING_ the Spotter Network can do to stop someone from abusing the information that each member of the spotter network has provided to the general public. It is the risk one must accept to provide a service to the community. I wish it where not the case, but it is a fact. If someone believes that a solution _does_ exist and that I am wrong in believing that nothing can be done, please join the discussion over on the Spotter Network forum. I will investigate and implement any good idea that benefits the community.

I will bring up the issue of our ToS and use of the information we provide with the advisory committee. Technically, there is nothing the SN can do to stop someone from abusing that information (we can't afford lawyers), but maybe we can make it more clear that we do not condone it.

-Tyler

 

[Chris Novy]

This is the first I've heard of the ISU SN site but I've always been tempted to write an application to reverse-engineer the data just to see what people are doing out there.

Let's be clear about one thing, nobody can stop people with access to the data from writing applications to interpret that data in ways not originally anticipated/intended by the SN folks. For instance, I could write an application that determines your home location --based on average occurrence of your SN icon-- and then sell that information to VictimizeMe.com so that thieves could burglarize your home when the data shows you're gone. Or perhaps I could use the data to know when you are out storm chasing and are staying at a motel (a quick GIS cross-reference) so that I can find your vehicle and steal all of your video equipment. And forget about blaming SpotterNetwork. I can already derive this same locator information from anyone with a cell phone who hasn't elected to turn off the GPS tracking feature that most providers offer.

Let's get beyond the knee-jerk reaction and look at the facts in this case. SpotterNetwork was not compiling the speed information nor were they distributing it, telling people how to create it themselves, or were they otherwise using information derived from the raw data to harm or affect the privacy of its users. I mean it's not like Facebook deliberately selling "private" profile information for commercial purposes. That said, SpotterNetwork may decide to encrypt and limit access to the location files and share access only with trusted software authors --say Gibson Ridge, NWS, Swift, etc. I'm sure this it something which will be discussed amongst the SN higher-ups should questions about privacy persist. Point being, don't blame a public-minded service like SpotterNetwork for the "misuse" of locator data by third parties.

Rest assured, however, SpotterNetwork isn't the only system capable of tracking speed information. My own car is full of specialized goodies (from video to speed radar to license plate capture) that can spell major trouble for anyone seriously crossing the line --be they storm chasers, drunk drivers, or road ragers. Don't believe me, check out the final episodes of Storm Chasers this year and see how well things worked out for the TIV. Chase safe, have a good time. Chase like a maniac and you'll get what you've got coming to you.

..Chris..

 

[Wes Carter]

Mr. Allison, I cannot speak for everyone else but that explanation does satisfy me for the most part. My only disagreement would be whether or not the concerns were valid. I think a concern is valid if it is honest, even if it is because a person does not have enough information. Those concerns can be addressed by simply providing the information, telling the person you don't have the information, or telling the person that the information cannot be shared for whatever reason.

Thank you for responding to this thread. At first I regretted starting it, but after your response I think you did a fairly good job of addressing the issue so maybe it did serve a good purpose. I'm not patting myself on the back, because I still think I should have PM'd you first and for that please accept my apology.

 

[Darin Brunin]

Rest assured, however, SpotterNetwork isn't the only system capable of tracking speed information. My own car is full of specialized goodies (from video to speed radar to license plate capture) that can spell major trouble for anyone seriously crossing the line --be they storm chasers, drunk drivers, or road ragers. Don't believe me, check out the final episodes of Storm Chasers this year and see how well things worked out for the TIV. Chase safe, have a good time. Chase like a maniac and you'll get what you've got coming to you.

Hopefully you enjoy the storms too

 

[Wes Carter]

Rest assured, however, SpotterNetwork isn't the only system capable of tracking speed information. My own car is full of specialized goodies (from video to speed radar to license plate capture) that can spell major trouble for anyone seriously crossing the line --be they storm chasers, drunk drivers, or road ragers. Don't believe me, check out the final episodes of Storm Chasers this year and see how well things worked out for the TIV. Chase safe, have a good time. Chase like a maniac and you'll get what you've got coming to you.

..Chris..

I have a couple of questions. Are you a police officer? And are you the person that caught the TIV passing in a no-passing zone?

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

Hey, it's a free country. People are free to chug a fifth of whiskey and weave into a wedge going 120mph, and Chris Novy is free to videotape them and turn them into an awesome talk at next year's Chasercon.

 

[Jason Foster]

Wow...this almost has gone 'viral' for a thread here on ST...LOL. Was busy "experimenting" making a YT video go viral (the NYC plow truck destruction)...I think it worked...just wish it was my own video), otherwise probably would have contributed more here along the way (I'm only upto post 20 attm).

I can't believe the crazy reactions and such for this and other issues over time. Considering how many things in the chaser world have played out...I know there are often other motives for such public statements made by certain people. Problem is...one often doesn't know when they are genuine posts for discussion, or folks setting up opportunities to provide themselves some sort of advantage.

I guess all I'm saying....the next few months will be interest to watch...see what happens to pop up (or not pop up). I probably put this thread with an expected expiration date of four days from now.

 

[Tim Vasquez]

I have stepped in and done some editing of this thread to remove the derail / flame war (which should not be continued or discussed any further). There were also a couple of unrelated ad hominem posts that were in bad taste and warranted infractions, and which have been removed.

There have been some top-notch posts in this thread about privacy issues and the spotter networks, which shores this topic up well enough to let it continue.

Thanks,

Tim

 

[Jeff Smith]

Now that the thread is back open, I want to publically thank Tyler for his explanation and comments. I also want to apologize publically to Tyler for my comments concerning his earlier replies. We all now see how this all went down and I for one am glad that the IEM site is gone. It is also my bad for not fully understanding how the data could be archived by anyone and used for whatever reason they wish. Knowing now what I did not understand, I will not use SN simply because of that. Call it what you want, but it's my decision. I will still do my service reporting severe weather, just by other means.