Suggest DISCUSS or TALK Type Threads

[Bill Tabor]

I think we should add to Maproom a DISCUSS or TALK type thread. These would be used for discussing the chase or weather event after the fact and not just as a chase account, forecast, or now report. Currently I believe we do not have this option and we need a place to discuss the event in more detail and share observations and experiences / comments with others. Take for example yesterday's IA tornado episode with 24 tornadoes logged. I think these may have been mini-supercell tornadoes and I think it would be good to discuss with others. Sure I could create a topic in WEATHERLAB just for this and have comments but I don't think that would be easy / obvious for others to find and not directly linked to each event by date as it is in MAPROOM. Besides the rules don't allow us to discuss recent events in WEATHERLAB anyway. This means that we miss out on a lot of discussion and natural interaction about interesting events.

Let's be able to talk about these events. Just think of all the discussion that went on with the hurricanes this last season. That's the kind of interest / discussion and in debt coverage I am talking about.

Also this should not impact the download bandwidth of chasers on the road grabbing data and comments because even though in MAPROOM they do not have to click on the DISCUSS threads.

 

[nickgrillo]

Personally, I do not see a reason to do this... For that matter, any major event worth discussing is obviously allowed in the "WeatherLab" section -- even if it was just recent (such as yesterday's tornadoes and last week's killer IN tornado) since there is no rules prohibiting conversation of the event itself (reports 48hrs or less old belong in the Maproom). I don't see any reason why events shouldn't be discussed in "WeatherLab", if you ask me...

By the way, those supercells yesterday were NOT mini-supercells (they were all classics -- with the "northern-most" supercell taking on a HP shape later in it's lifespan).

 

[Robert Dewey]

By the way, those supercells yesterday were NOT mini-supercells (they were all classics -- with the "northern-most" supercell taking on a HP shape later in it's lifespan).

Maybe that should be in a Weather Lab thread?? :wink: :lol:

 

[nickgrillo]

Per the latest Maproom rules:

(1) Purpose of Map Room. Map Room is designed for storm chasing events that have happened anywhere from 48 hours in the past to anytime in the future. If the event happened more than 48 hours ago, it is considered historical and may be discussed elsewhere on the Stormtrack site.

While the IA tornadoes were barely 24 hours ago, it's obvious we are free to discuss this situation in "WeatherLab" because of it's significant nature. If we are gonna discuss past weather situations in the Maproom, what is the point of having "WeatherLab" anyways?

 

[Gabe Garfield]

Bill, I tend to agree. Everyone is SO pedantic about the TOS, but it's interesting to note that almost everyone (including mods) break those rules in order to post something that is relevant (but not necessarily Map Room material) in a Target or Now thread. I know everyone would like a high signal to noise ratio, and perhaps this would be a good way of doing it. Then again, too many subgroups for a similar topic might get annoying (e.g. flipping from thread to thread).

By the way, those supercells yesterday were NOT mini-supercells

I didn't know that there was a fourth category! LOL

Gabe

 

[Bill Tabor]

Per the latest Maproom rules:

(1) Purpose of Map Room. Map Room is designed for storm chasing events that have happened anywhere from 48 hours in the past to anytime in the future. If the event happened more than 48 hours ago, it is considered historical and may be discussed elsewhere on the Stormtrack site.

While the IA tornadoes were barely 24 hours ago, it's obvious we are free to discuss this situation in "WeatherLab" because of it's significant nature. If we are gonna discuss past weather situations in the Maproom, what is the point of having "WeatherLab" anyways?

I disagree. I wish what you said was true but right now it is not clearly spelled out in the rules we can post in Weatherlab about events that took place only 24 hours ago. You just quoted the line that stated it. Also because of the type of threads and rules for MAPROOM we cannot techically post there either within 48 hours because it does not fit as either Forecast, Now, or Report.

Currently there are about 3 violations of this in Weatherlab concerning the IA event of yesterday and I emailed a moderator about it.

I think we should get it straight. If we are going to have strict rules then we need to make it clear what those rules are and how people can post. If there aren't places and types of threads to post certain things then we either need to create new thread types, or make the rules more verbose and specific. You say it's 'obvious' we can discuss in Weatherlab because it's significant but where does it say that?

 

[Bill Tabor]

By the way, those supercells yesterday were NOT mini-supercells (they were all classics -- with the "northern-most" supercell taking on a HP shape later in it's lifespan).

Is that true? When I checked one of the tor warned cells it's height was only 19.6K - that sounds mini to me.

But this is a perfect example of what I would like to discuss if we had a place to discuss it. This is actually what brought this up for me.

 

[nickgrillo]

Bill, I tend to agree. Everyone is SO pedantic about the TOS, but it's interesting to note that almost everyone (including mods) break those rules in order to post something that is relevant (but not necessarily Map Room material) in a Target or Now thread. I know everyone would like a high signal to noise ratio, and perhaps this would be a good way of doing it. Then again, too many subgroups for a similar topic might get annoying (e.g. flipping from thread to thread).

By the way, those supercells yesterday were NOT mini-supercells

I didn't know that there was a fourth category! LOL

Gabe

LOL, I meant that these were warm sector supercells... And not "cold-core" events a couple were predicting them to be yesterday morning (these were indeed warm sector storms).

 

[Karen Politte]

Well, actually I'd have to stick my hand up and agree with Bill on this one.

I think that most everybody on this forum understands what's expected of them as far as following the rules. Sometimes a fracture takes place here or there - but it's rarely out of malice.

I feel that Map Room is lacking something for those of us who simply wish to have a place to chat about events. I don't post there very often for this same reason......as I rarely seem to chase anymore either so I don't have first-hand chase accounts to post, and I don't always have the time or inclination to post formal forecasts. I'm always also very cognizant of the Map Room rules and don't want to be seen as a nuisance to ST's hard working moderators a lot of the time :lol: .

Of course, there would have to be some formal pointers about posting in a thread of this type too, if it were to be created. I still wouldn't want to see full renditions of warning or outlook text from SPC, etc. or anything like that.

But - on the whole - I don't feel that Map Room would be *hurt* by adding this type of facility. At least as a trial - maybe in spring 2006 at first.

KR

 

[nickgrillo]

Per the latest Maproom rules:

(1) Purpose of Map Room. Map Room is designed for storm chasing events that have happened anywhere from 48 hours in the past to anytime in the future. If the event happened more than 48 hours ago, it is considered historical and may be discussed elsewhere on the Stormtrack site.

While the IA tornadoes were barely 24 hours ago, it's obvious we are free to discuss this situation in "WeatherLab" because of it's significant nature. If we are gonna discuss past weather situations in the Maproom, what is the point of having "WeatherLab" anyways?

I disagree. I wish what you said was true but right now it is not clearly spelled out in the rules we can post in Weatherlab about events that took place only 24 hours ago. You just quoted the line that stated it. Also because of the type of threads and rules for MAPROOM we cannot techically post there either within 48 hours because it does not fit as either Forecast, Now, or Report.

Currently there are about 3 violations of this in Weatherlab concerning the IA event of yesterday and I emailed a moderator about it.

I think we should get it straight. If we are going to have strict rules then we need to make it clear what those rules are and how people can post. If there aren't places and types of threads to post certain things then we either need to create new thread types, or make the rules more verbose and specific. You say it's 'obvious' we can discuss in Weatherlab because it's significant but where does it say that?

There is no "in stone" writing on that... But it's obvious the whole administration allows it -- and I don't see much wrong with it, neither. The Maproom is for current and ongoing severe weather events... While WeatherLab is for weather discussions in general (and is a great place for past events).

 

[Bill Tabor]

There is no "in stone" writing on that... But it's obvious the whole administration allows it -- and I don't see much wrong with it, neither. The Maproom is for current and ongoing severe weather events... While WeatherLab is for weather discussions in general (and is a great place for past events).

Maybe, I'd like to see a Moderator or Administrator make this clear because right now that is preventing me from discussing the Iowa event. I wanted to talk about mini supercells and weather this fit the classic definition or if they were some type of hybrid mini's from the general Jon Davies def - that even though perhaps in the warm sector still very small tornadic cells highly influenced by the overruning perhaps of the 500mb cold air? Anyway I wanted to break it down with others - post analysis and see what really happened.