The StormTrack Lurker Controversy

I don't post on this blog of mine very often.

But now's a good time.

Tim, the manager of StormTrack, has decided to make a decision. As it is his blog to do with what he likes to do with, he is the General in charge, he has made the decision to remove lurkers with low post counts from StormTrack. This is the message that StormTrack readers were greeted with:

"This is official notice that on October 1 we will be pruning out dead accounts, lurkers, and all spam zombie accounts that have slipped through over the years. Accounts will be autodeleted for those who have an extremely low post count total (zero or very close to zero) and have been here at least 1-2 months.

Individuals will also be removed if short one-liners are posted just to evade the deletion, or if all posts are in Bar & Grill.

If you consider yourself a lurker, you will still be able to view the weather discussions even as an unregistered guest, so in practice this will not affect you and there is nothing you need to do. However we are a community based forum and our goal is to share meaningful information about severe weather, so participating is what we expect in return for having an account here.

This will not be done before October 1 so if you haven't posted, there's no rush until then. If you're a newbie, the educational forum is a good place to begin."

A few things to start with:

• This was the first "Official Notice" that StormTrack ever had a problem with "lurkers".
• There was no reason as to the reason why except for "lack of participation".
• Evasion by posting in "Bar and Grill" or all posts in "Bar and Grill" won't help.
• "Participation is expected" if you have an account on StormTrack.

StormTrack has a long, sorted history of making controversial decisions. Under the leadership of Tim Vasquez, there have been at least two "failed" decisions under StormTrack. There was the "Core Group" fiasco - where a hidden set of forums for "veteran" storm chasers" was put into motion. This bombed dramatically and almost completely split up the forum - and indeed at the least incensed the community and brought out a forum war like none other.

Then, there was the actions of censureship by Tim Vasquez as the last post alluded to - where Tim attempted to censure any discussion on another forum group he was also a member of. This group threw a fit when it's elite forum was discovered, and Tim reacted by banning all talk on the group. This caused another furor, and before too long, this too blew up, forcing Tim to withdraw any association with the group. Soon, this too boiled down.

And now, this. On the outside it doesn't seem like to big of a deal. But let's analyze this carefully.

Any forum administrator knows (or should know) that the removal of any account of any member is a big deal - no matter how new the account. And it is standard procedure in most forums to mention the expectation of participation before joining. Such has not been the case on StormTrack. In fact, in the forum, there has rarely been ANY mention of lurkers - or problems with lurkers in the past. It had been a non-issue.

Then Tim drops the bomb, suddenly, with "Official notice" that lurkers will be removed on October 1st - those lurkers with post counts at zero or close to zero. And this has not been controversial - as controversy seems to be a hallmark of the leadership of Tim's StormTrack.

Almost immediately the thread was greeted by those who supported the decision - and those who did not. Suddenly, some members were scared with low counts that their accounts were to be deleted. Some were shocked - others didn't get it. Those supporting Tim simply stated "It's his forum, he does as he pleases." But regardless of anything, it started another famous StormTrack Controversy. 18 pages and 175 comments worth. And to me, that is unnaceptable.

Unnaceptable for many reasons I will detail.

First, the job of an administrator is to at all costs avoid controversial threads. This detracts from the mission of the forum, reduces morale of forum posters, increases the work load of moderators, and sends a negative signal to stormtrack.

Second, there's no excuse for the controversy. It could have been avoided completely if the post had been firstly more specific, secondly, outlined the real reasons, and thirdly, if there was a problem with lurkers, a general announcement or talk from the admin concerning lurkers should have been issued before threats of account removal. Again, in my opinion, Tim Vasquez handled it with a rod of iron and handled it completely wrong - as we can see 18 pages and 175 comments later. StormTrack under Tim can't seem to function without a controversy - and it seems to happen with his way of management and decision making almost every time - amber light bars and chase issues beside.

I have been a StormTrack member since the inception of StormTrack back in December of 2003. I have been observing and studying weathe since the 80s, chasing since 1997 and actively on the Plains since 2002, and StormTrack has been a big part - and a valuable part - of my chasing hobby. I think it is a forum that serves a great purpose for storm chasers. I believe that it has created a place for chasers to discuss, share, learn and grow in chasing and has been invaluable. My problem is not with the concept of Storm Track. There's no denying it is successful. There is no denying it is the largest chase forum in the United States. There's no denying it is home to some of the finest chasers and meteorological minds in the world. There's no denying it has structure.

But the controversies - the constant controversies that appear on the forum time after time after time again - frankly, it's ridiculous, and frankly, it's an embarrassment to go into Stormtrack and see 175 posts and 18 pages of controversy over something so easily avoidable.

But on StormTrack, it's not a democracy, it's a Timocracy. Tim's style of government is one of complete presidential rule and management - and what Tim says is what happens. Therefore, all are subject to every policy made by Tim without question. And nothing said here or anywhere else will change his mind.

So until Tim realizes, in my opinion, that StormTrack is not a branch of Federal Government - it's a group of hobbyist storm chasers - who value their accounts - and operates as all forums do, with lurkers and posters alike - strange and controlling decisions - such as this one to arbitrarily remove lurkers with the "participate or get kicked off" mentality - will do nothing but bring more controversy, more 18 page, 175 thread posts of complete uselessness and confusion - and just cause people to wonder what in the world is going on at StormTrack now. And the truth of the matter is, nothing is accomplished by unilaterally removing lurker accounts. Nothing. It doesn't affect bandwidth, it does not affect anything technical, it doesn't do anything for the forum. What it does do is cause lurkers to post not because they want to, but because they have to - it forces what should come natural with time into a "post or else" mentality.

And that's just in my opinion plain bad decision making.

Tim's forum or not Tim's forum, that's my opinion. Come on, Tim. These are internet-based discussion forums, and lurkers have been and always will be a part of the equation. Autodelete these lurkers, you're going to get a whole new set in the future down the road you'll have to do the same thing with all over again. And then the same auto-deletion all over again - and you'll inherit a bunch of posters who feel forced to post when they should never, ever feel forced to do anything. People learn at their own pace and at their own time - just as people should post at their own pace and at their own time. This isn't the time to police people into posting. This is the time to motivate through the proper methods - great discussions, motivation, and fun.

But if history proves anything, none of this will matter in Tim's World - after all, he's the boss, he makes the decisions, and that's all that matters.

I wonder what the next great confusion-laced, 200 post controversy is going to be. But you can bet Tim will somehow have his hand in the reason for it. StormTrack is a great forum that has great benefits and serves a great purpose. It's a great forum. But it could be greater without the MESS.

Tim, you've done a terrific job with a terrific forum and built one of the finest forums on weather and chasing on the internet. Quit ruining it with your red-tape, government-like my way or the highway regulations that serve no purpose but inciting controversy and confusion. Start working with your member group by communicating with them the problems you see instead of attempting to control them through "firing" them. You'll find a much better, much smoother forum in the long term and so much less damn controversy.

Tim's ST Decision: An Analysis and Thoughts.

This just in: Tim from the Stormtrack forum has made a decision concerning the massive upheaval with CFDG members vs. Stormtrack members. Here it is:

"Myself and the moderators have had a long pow-wow on the highly controversial CFDG issue that boiled over on this board last week. Our decision is that suppressing discussion about the group is a departure from our editorial policy and is against the best interests of Stormtrack.

However, for the past 30 years, the spirit of Stormtrack has been to share weather knowledge and strengthen the social bonds within the severe weather community. Our members are fully expected to adhere to these standards. Alienating other people within the chase community does not fix anything... working for positive change does.

To further defuse any perceived conflicts of interest, I resigned my CFDG membership this morning... that way you can be assured that from here on out I am representing the interests of Stormtrack.

Tim"

Paragaph one:

Man, oh man, do I sometimes wish I was a fly on the wall in the ST administrative hidden thread. It must have been interesting - I am glad that they were open and honest with their pow wow. That's good to hear, and I am glad that moderators were chosen who (I hope) expressed their true opinions and feelings regarding the actions of the administrator. I am even more pleased to read of the decision not to suppress discussion about a group. That's great!

But pardon me, I need to get this off my chest. HELLO!!! HELLO!!! This should never have come to this point! Read again what Tim said. "Suppressing discussion about the group". So that was it! It was NOT that the thread had gotten out of hand, as Tim said when he locked the thread in question. It was that CFDG was being discussed, which in turn eliminated their secrecy even more then it was. It's clear that the whole point of Tim locking the thread was to suppress discussion. Sad, sad, sad. This is something I am hopeful will never, EVER be repeated again. I'm glad the decision was made to NOT suppress discussion but hello, this is a no-brainer, people.

Paragraph two:

This is disturbing still. It's almost as if Tim has to get his digs in to say " Ok, fine. Talk about it then, have it your way. But don't say anything that could alienate another member". Let's be clear about how internet forums operate. Remember, I am an admin myself, I have a vested interest in these areas.

This internet forum, Stormtrack, has an area called "Chase Bar and Grill". It's hidden to guests, and you can talk about anything you like in there.

Let's look at rule 12 of the Stormtrack rules.


12. Content disclaimer. Although the owners of Stormtrack have discretion to delete offensive material according to their personal judgement, these rights are rarely exercised. We depend on the free flow of debate and discussion to keep Stormtrack healthy and reduce administrative load. You must discontinue using Stormtrack and find another venue if you feel that the moderators or administrators are not censoring content to your satisfaction.

This is the rule that should continue to be the rule. It is pointless for Tim to come out in point 2 and say they are fully expected to adhere to standards that "do not alienate people". Here's the thing: People are going to have differences of opinion, different thoughts and different processes and reactions. In a forum where free flow is allowed (AS IT IS STATED HERE, FREE FLOW OF DEBATE AND DISCUSSION), what then defines conduct or activity that "alienates" others? Alienation is when a member leaves because they disagree with an opinion in the forum world. If they disagree and want to leave that's their choice. The duty of an administrator and/or a moderator is not to dictate what is talked about so long as it is of legal content and does not directly attack or is hostile to another member as per the ad hominem guideline. Therefore, it is not the concern of the administrator, the moderator, or the member if it alienates another member whatsoever. That is between the one who made the post and the one who took issue with the post. The administrator and the moderator team are there to ensure there is no violation of forum rules. There should never be, outside of illegal or previously restricted content (such as religion or politics) administrative action placed on conversation, especially civil conversation about a civil matter. Period. Don't put an umbrella over people's heads telling them to think twice about what to talk about if it is outside of politics and religion. The day that happens is the day I am gone.

Paragraph Three:

Bravo. HUGE Kudos to Tim here, this was the proper decision and the best one he could have made. He alleviated the perception of a conflict of interest and has pledged his allegiance to Stormtrack. Good move, yes. Now let's make sure that the "CFDG group" doesn't still appear to be "running the board" behind closed doors by complaining to Tim every time someone says something about their group and demanding suppresion of conversation. So long as discussion - ANY discussion - is civil, straightforward, and is not in violation of any established rule, let it be, so this kind of needless and senseless fiasco is avoided in the future from now on.

Ending comment: None of this had to be in the first place. This is a positive step. I'm concerned about the veiled "members are expected to adhere to these standards" statement because it appears to be a broad, wide open policy with unnamed consequences. It would have been best just to leave that out. But over all, a great step in a better direction.

Man, come on spring, just get our minds off all this bull and give us some freakin storms already!

The Look.

I woke up this morning and immediately recognized "The Look".

You know "The Look". The icy, milky look in clouds that can only suggest the presence of ice crystals - the look that almost causes snow shovels to grow feet and salt grains to excite themselves with potential work prospects - the combination of these icy clouds against barren trees creates the excitement for winter weather that only a weather lover would know.

However daunting it was this morning, it was a fantasy. The temperature profiles had risen just enough to prevent the precipitation to fall as frozen precipitation. What could have been some delicious eye candy proved only to be a dampening light rain creating drear instead of beauty.

Though it ruined my hopes for the stray mixed flake - it wasn't to be - it let me know the arrival of winter's breath is certainly not far at all from this moment in time.

ST in the eye, models come back around

Stormtrack is in the eye of the storm as members await the decision of Tim as to the new "Policy" regarding discussion of "The Other Forum", CFDG. It's calm now, but what in the world is going to happen when Tim makes his decision?

Truth be known, Tim's not going to win no matter what he does.

If he clamps down and says "Shut up! Don't talk about CDFG or post their public material!", there will be a loud, vocal and angry outcry and revolt from some ST members. If he does not, there will be a loud, vocal and angry outcry from the CDFG'ers. Tim, being a CDFG member, certainly has his hands full. We shall learn where his priorities are when the decision comes out, shall we?

On the weather front, models coming back around to a wintery thanksgiving so watching that closely. I saw what appeared to be a flake of snow tonight. Could of been a bug. Watching yard light effects can be deceiving.

It's November - nothing to chase. See you next post!

Just yours truly.

Yeah, yeah, this is me. Obviously not the most respectable photo. So you know, this great shirt I was wearing right? The day after the photograph it ripped totally down the back - all the way down, and I didn't know it. As fate would have it, I was fortunate enough to not realize it until walking all the way down my workplace aisle - and having 2 managers notice it.

They ended up taping it up - literally - till my workday ended.

Working with a scotch-taped shirt. Brilliant!

Waiting for winter

Ah the big early season flip flops of the ol GFS good for sh*t weather models. Dont you love it?

I'm not holding my breath on any winter storm over the next week - but yesterday's charts looked great with a strong closed low developing in the central plains accompanied by an arctic intrusion and strong gradient producing wintery, windy conditions -- right? right?

Hello, GFS? make up your mind?

Of course I know that this is par for the course - definately this early out, and not to discount this - also know to rely strongly on ensembles and cross model comparison. For these reasons I am not holding much hope on this one - because the GFS is coming in line with ensembles, not the other way around.

The good news is this winter being the first storm I dont have a bias to point to with past winter storms yet - this is the first - so I wont really know till it's 2 or 3 days out. Which is coming closer and closer. Time will tell - but I really, really need some meteorological excitement. After all, there's no severe weather - that's gone until springtime.

Oh, the drama of internet forums.

You have got to love the drama of internet forums. I have to share some here tonight.

I am a member of Stormtrack, the forum board for chasers. Stormtrack is a very diverse and well run internet forum for storm chasers - novice to professional. Stormtrack is a board with an eclectic and diverse group of people from all around the world. Tonight things got quite a little heated.

You see, there's an alternative forum as well. That forum is called CFDG. It stands for "Chase Forecast Discussion Group". The group was formed by close-knit friends as an email-based discussion group which transformed to a quite secretive forum - hidden and quite reclusive by most standards. It's purpose is to apparently share a large breadth of chase forecasting knowledge amongst each other without outside "interference".

The fireworks started tonight when members of the Stormtrack forum began discussing the CFDG group - and one member decided to post their then-public membership list. Apparently this conversation greatly ired some members of the CFDG group - because within minutes the list was pulled from public view. Not only that, but the administrator of the Stormtrack forum - Tim - who ordinarily does a great job - decided to lock the thread because, in his words, it got out of hand, and we were to take the discussion off Stormtrack.

This upset me greatly. Why, you ask? Because, a few days earlier, there were other heated discussions amongst members concerning another highly volatile subject - and the actions in this long winded, debatable discussion were lightly moderated, even when there were pretty near ad hominem attacks - the highest offense in the Stormtrack world, it seems. The thread was split, and some posts were moderated - but there was no locking of the thread.

Suddenly when the CFDG forum is listed and is being discussed - civily and courteosly, I might add - and the member list is posted (which does not violate any rules whatsoever, it was publically obtained), the thread is locked and the members are silenced. The admin of ST, Tim, is a member of CFDG.

The owner said this was done because he was getting floods of angry emails from people concerning the thread's conversation about CFDG. This is ridiculous. They know they are known and recognized - what then is the point of trying to contain secrecy. I am not, have not been, and will not be a member of CFDG even if invited (fat chance) but I think it is quite clear concerning their true intent - to retain knowledge, remain secretive, and invite only those elite enough in the chasing circles to make it into their club.

CFDG has a right to run their forum the way they want to, as does Stormtrack, and any other internet forum on the planet. I administrate one myself I shall not name, due to its popularity and subject, so I am aware of how these forums work. However stated, when the actions of one forum spill over through the actions of another forum due to perceived outcries from the - dare I say - elite - forum, there's a problem. There's a conflict of interest that is squarely on the shoulders of the ST administrator. To him its not fair, and to me the whole thing is just boggling.

I dont care if CFDG hides out in a swamp, or remains secretive for the rest of their internet lives. It's not my business. My concern is when a thread is locked and shut down because of the cries of the members of another forum over what the content of the admin's forum is. It's not right, and policies should not have to be set forth to restrict speech to ease the minds of the other group. Let people say what they are going to say. If you don't like it, and as long as it does not break established netiquette and rules, for crying out loud, let it be. I am in strong disagreement of how this was handled. There will, it seems, always be this rift between CFDG and ST - and I dont know of a way to heal that at this point - it just grows and grows.