THE MAPROOM

[Dave Kaplow]

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

<!--QuoteBegin-rdale

No, I think the academic discussions are great. It's the one-liners that don't offer anything that my 7yr old daughter can find which are the noise problems.

I agree with you, Rob. The more academic discussion here, the better. It's just that the Map Room isn't the place for it. It's not chasing. It's weather weenie talk.[/b]

Yes, exactly, I think we all want that kind of stuff, but it doesn't really belong in the Map Room. Yet it might also look out of place in the current Weather forum, and that's why I was advocating an advanced technical area. I think the advanced topic thing was misunderstood, people thought we were talking about an elite Map Room clone... I don't know about Mike U (who first proposed it), but my idea was more about technical stuff that as you say really belongs in Weather Lab, but isn't getting posted there currently. As far as I'm concerned all items dealing with a current chaseable event belong in Map Room, unless the poster is merely using the ongoing event as an example in support of some personal theory, in which case the post should probably go elsewhere, as the main point would be the theory and not the unfolding event.

About the 48 hour limit on Reports... I can see where some folks might have a problem with it. As I see it, the problem here is that there are really 2 different kinds of Report. There is the report from the road by a chaser giving a quick glimpse of what is either ongoing or has just been observed, and then there is the full chase-log type of report that is put together with care after the chase is well over. Both kinds of report are desirable, but I’m thinking the 2nd kind might actually be better housed away from the Map Room. What I’d really like to see is a 2-tier system, with the quick and informative reports from the field appearing in the Map Room, and the later more polished and detailed reports perhaps going elsewhere, maybe to a permanent "archive of events" section. I know, I know, this is unlikely to ever be implemented and I shouldn't have brought it up, but the fact remains that we are currently treating Report posts as if they all serve a single purpose, and I'm not sure that they do.

 

[Darren Addy]

I think it is worth mentioning that just because you don't SEE it being moderated, doesn't mean it isn't BEING moderated. For example, I made an improper/uninformative comment in a Map Room thread and got a quick PM from the moderator informing me of my violation and what continued violations could lead to. (Which I think is great). I'm sure the same thing is happening to a lot of the posters of the comments that are being objected to as "low quality".

You have to accept that a certain amount of "education" is going to be occurring with increased moderation and this should (in time) lead to the desired effect of a higher quality board (and in particular - Map Room).

I'd urge those of you who would like to be mods to qualify to be mods in the future - but acting like a mod-wanna-be, assuming that no moderation is being done and then publicly complaining about it (or bad posts) isn't doing a lot to help the signal to noise ratio on Stormtrack.

Darren Addy
Kearney, NE

 

[Tim Stoecklein]

VERY good point Darren! :wink: I'm no MOD, but I'd rather (and have) educate those who make 'improper' posts through PM otherwise you're just adding to the pile........

Tim

 

[Bill Tabor]

I think you folks are somewhat off on a tangent and discussing a lot of what has already been provided, as well as method of execution. You are asking about more moderation in Maproom, and should it be centered around chasers, and low quality posts, etc. These are already explained generally in the new rules:

*(1) Stormtrack's purpose is to provide quality discussion for and about chasers.

Also: Stormtrack's primary objective is to provide a venue for quality storm chasing discussion. All other objectives are secondary to that. We aggressively enforce all rules.
Also: 2. Purpose. The Stormtrack forum is intended for discussion about WEATHER and STORM CHASING.

(5) There is no more membership list for Target Area (Map Room). Members are now responsible for the consequences of posting here. Failure to follow the rules, including contributing low quality material, will result in suspension.

(2) Disruption of Map Room threads. Users are expected to closely adhere to these guidelines and the posting style implemented in Map Room. Failure to do so will result in a Map Room posting ban, or suspension.

(3) Prohibited content. Users may NOT post weather bulletins and forecast images except as brief excerpts and with original supporting information. Frivolous content is prohibited.

I think (1) indicates that maproom (until rewritten) is about chasers and chasing. I do believe however they intend that severe meteorologists and forecasters are welcome to post for the input to the chase forecast. (5), (2), (3) indicate that moderation will be the vehicle for keeping Maproom on track as opposed to a membership list. These also explain that low quality posts and posts that violate the style and guidelines can result in user suspension or banning.

These really seem fairly clear. Sure they could have elaborated a bit more. It is saying everyone is welcome to post in Maproom, but be careful because if you are frivolous and wasting everyone's time, or just breaking post rules then you can be suspended or banned by the moderators or adminstrator.

I will add however that I think the brief descriptions about each section and the method of allowed posting to each section should be expanded upon so that everyone knows how to post and what exactly they can post, etc. See my 'How to Post?' thread for an example.

Alternatively, it may be that the descriptions of each section and it's use are brief and somewhat vague because the goal is to restrict, but allow it to be a little bit flexible and open ended. This is fine, but if this the case then moderators shouldn't give people too much of a hard time if they fudge a bit. I don't think they do. I think they give everyone a little bit of leeway and running room.

Finally, the rule changes state:
"It would be great to cater to weather weenies, observers, spotters, and amateur scientists, but there are other sites available for that."

So I think it is clear, and once again I will go on record (in case that has somehow gotten lost in the discussion of so many opinions) stating that I support the new rules and the 'chase centric' focus. Like they say they would like to support all groups (meaning 'purposes'), but Stormtrack is and has always been about chasing. I believe they feel that weather weenies, observers, spotters, and amateur scientists are all welcome as long as they have a chase focus, or are chasing, or perhaps want to contribute to a chase forecast. In other words, everything is cool so long as it somehow has a tie in to chasing. Existing members will remain as long as they observe the rules. New applicants will apparently be screened to maintain a high quality 'chase centric' or chase centered / focused membership.