NE.Weather Moderated
Joshua Lindstrom
I am an avid weather enthusiast. I have participated in other
newsgroups dealing with weather that have been unmoderated. I would
LOVE to see a moderated group available for people who choose to have a
family friendly environment to discuss weather and environmental issues.
I vote for the ne.weather.moderated to be brought onboard the choice of
newsgroups!!!!!
Bring it on.....
Joshua Lindstrom
Martin Hannigan
I read the charter. Nice work. I'm for it.
The "vested" statement I made earlier was to give the moderators
flexibility to boot potential disruptors, invaders or other trolls.
[....]
-M
Tony Cristaldi
I echo Josh's thoughts, and look forward to the creation of NE.W.M
where one can participate in thought provoking weather discussions
without having to sift through posts and comments that denigrate the
otherwise friendly spirit of the NG.
Tony Cristaldi
NWS Melbourne FL
Gary and Georgette
is needed to the disruptions that always seems to occur in ne.weather. It
will be nice to have a place that weather can be discussed without
personalities, politics and other off topic posts distract from the purpose.
Gary
Chameleon22
>> I vote for the ne.weather.moderated to be brought onboard the choice of
>> newsgroups!!!!!
>
I am also in favor of ne.weather.moderated group! Having a family friendly
atmosphere in which to discuss weather events will be a positive step for
anyone who is interested in weather.
Cham
"Don't knock the weather; nine-tenths of the people couldn't start a
conversation if it didn't change once in a while."
-Kin Hubbard
Toddwx
after I posted a RFD, and followed the same general procedure as we are doing
now, back in nov/1994.
I am strongly in favor of the new moderated group. As one of the meteorologists
at Channel 7 in Boston, I constantly point students and weather enthusiasts
towards the group ne.weather for learning and discussion. This group has helped
turn out weather amateurs that are move knowledgeable than many "pros" that I
know!!
Disruptions with foul language, flame baiting, and worse have since made
ne.weather an unworthy place to recommend people to go to. We need a forum
where National Weather Service personel, television meteorologists, along with
students, and folks from all walks of life can post w/o fear of facing swears
and personal attacks. The charter as proposed certainly fits that bill.
Thank You
Todd Gross
Channel 7 , Boston
John Mann
been subjected to countless attacks by a number of people who have gone so far
as to continuously change their posting name to avoid filtering. I think the
moderated group is definitely called for, and I support the people who are
trying to get it going.
"Joshua Lindstrom" <net...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3B3B65B0...@sympatico.ca...
Ian Livingston
family atmosphere...but if we can get one it would be great. Im looking
forward to on-topic posts and less arguing.
-Ian Livingston
"Chameleon22" <chame...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20010628152153...@ng-fo1.aol.com...
Stephen Stein
ne.weather.moderated.
For whatever reason, discussions on ne.weather have too often strayed from
the weather and descended into spirals of personal attacks and baiting, to
the point that the group is downright unreadable.
While I don't want to see any weather-related content (even heated
arguments) stifled, we need to have some tools available to curtail
behavior that is abusive and obscene and without any relation to weather
discussion.
I support the creation of ne.weather.moderated.
- Steve Stein
Saraken
weather-related questions without being personally attacked.
deb
Concerned Weather Fan
the basis that it will split the informative posters among the two different
groups (it certainly did not work during the "chat wars" of this past
winter).
The reasoning behind this vote is, the people that are moderating this
"new" group, Josh and Charles in particular, were involved in the exact
kind of "flame wars" they say they will not allow...how can they pretend to
now moderate a group and be the "final sayers" when they themselves could
not control their tempers on ne.weather. If Todd Gross were running the
show I would feel better, but not the people who are listed now.
"Joshua Lindstrom" <net...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3B3B65B0...@sympatico.ca...
Stephen Stein
Concerned Weather Fan wrote:
> The reasoning behind this vote is, the people that are moderating this
> "new" group, Josh and Charles in particular, were involved in the exact
> kind of "flame wars" they say they will not allow
I would say that Josh and Charles were "involved" almost solely as targets of
abuse, not instigators.
> ...how can they pretend to
> now moderate a group and be the "final sayers" when they themselves could
> not control their tempers on ne.weather. If Todd Gross were running the
> show I would feel better, but not the people who are listed now.
Todd Gross *is* listed as among the moderators now. Please read the charter
above.
- Steve Stein
Toddwx
the time being, thanks
Todd
Toddwx
NOT to be a moderator because of flames against him on the ne.weather group
from a small group of possibly only TWO individuals. However, the rest of us
urged him not moderate. He has not, from what I have seen, been anything other
than a target of attack....... as I have been closely monitoring this for the
past few months.
Todd Gross
Chameleon22
>I think I would need to vote AGAINST the moderated version of ne.weather on
>the basis that it will split the informative posters among the two different
groups
Why in the world would it split posters? Is there any reason why a person can't
post in more that one locale?
Why would anyone feel the need to deny access to a type of group if that is
what they are most comfortable with?
By voting in favor of a moderated board, you are allowing everyone to have a
board where they will feel most comfortable.
Hopefully some of the WX professionals who abandoned ne.weather, when the flame
wars started will be willing to comeback and share their knowledge with us
again. This time without the personal attacks, and gutter language that has
been running wild the past year or so.
Banty
>Hopefully some of the WX professionals who abandoned ne.weather, when the flame
>wars started will be willing to comeback and share their knowledge with us
>again. This time without the personal attacks, and gutter language that has
>been running wild the past year or so.
>
>
>Cham
This is my hope, too. I used filters liberally to get away from the crap
on ne.weather. But the problem is, that the flames and such change the
nature of the group, such that what I see even after my filters is not what
the group could have been without the flames.
I would like to see a place where busy people who are professionals in the
field and don't have time to waste will come and make their contributions.
This is my number one reason to support the formation of
ne.weather.moderated.
Banty
Concerned Weather Fan
have probably never been involved..but the point was, they both cracked and
wrote back messages that would now be considered for "suspension" in this
moderated group. Hey, everyone is allowed second chances, and I am not
saying they are not, but I wanted to point out this issue as something that
needed to be discussed. It's no different than a fireman being let go from
his company for starting (or in this case, making it worse) a fire...then
going and starting his own fire company...wouldn't "Joe Citizen" be a little
leary of that new fire company?
"Stephen Stein" <s...@ultranet.com> wrote in message
news:3B3BA3FE...@ultranet.com...
Chameleon22
>on ne.weather. But the problem is, that the flames and such change the
>nature of the group, such that what I see even after my filters is not what
>the group could have been without the flames.
Not only does it change the nature of the group, but the history of the
flamers, are such that one must constantly be adding names to the filters. And
I for one just dont have time to deal with that sort of nonsense. I went to
ne.wx to read and talk about weather with like minded people, not have to have
crash course in filters, and the strategies of flame wars.
Concerned Weather Fan
put their original posts in each group? The charter/faq already says that
cross posting is not allowed, so a poster can not put both groups in his
post...so he/she would have to take the time to post something they feel
important to both groups. Do not think it will happen...I think the group
that "win's out" will draw most posters/readers while the other group will
wilt away.
You have a valid point about some people coming back that may have left, but
they left for several reasons...one was the abusive posts they were seeing,
but they also did not like the lack of meterological conversation the group
had turned into (Re: Model Discussion to the point of brain failure, 200+
posts (during snow storms) yelling about the "Big Bust", etc...those posts
are not going to go away if the moderated group takes over.
"Chameleon22" <chame...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20010628191507...@ng-mq1.aol.com...
Chameleon22
>Now, come on....are you telling me that each poster is gonna take time to
>put their original posts in each group? The charter/faq already says that
>cross posting is not allowed, so a poster can not put both groups in his
>post...so he/she would have to take the time to post something they feel
>important to both groups. Do not think it will happen...I think the group
>that "win's out" will draw most posters/readers while the other group will
>wilt away.
Well I guess it would depend on exactly how determined one was in posting or
receiving information. Copy and pasting one's own post is not that difficult a
task, when one is determined. ;) Besides I can envision different areas of
conversation from both areas. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so.
Chameleon22
>Finally, I would remind you that if one moderator gets out of line,
>there are four others. That's why the decision was made not only to not
>have one moderator, but not to have a "head moderator" or "chief
>moderator" either.
And as someone who supported and participated in the formation of the charter
for ne.weather.moderated, I found all of the proposed moderators to be
intelligent, rational people. and fully capable of making decisions based on
merit.
Banty
<danwe...@weather.org> wrote:
>Now, come on....are you telling me that each poster is gonna take time to
>put their original posts in each group? The charter/faq already says that
>cross posting is not allowed, so a poster can not put both groups in his
>post...so he/she would have to take the time to post something they feel
>important to both groups. Do not think it will happen...I think the group
>that "win's out" will draw most posters/readers while the other group will
>wilt away.
Naw. It's not unusal to have a regular and moderated group side by side.
I personally participate in two such groups - misc.kids and
misc.kids.moderated.
The tone and the pace of the groups are different, but many of the
participants are the same. Some aren't. Some won't post anywhere but the
moderated group, likewise for the other.
Banty
Toddwx
not sure what the problem is. If the moderated group draws better-liked
discussion and has more posts than ne.weather, then I forsee this as a vote of
confidence for the new group. The old group would not likely wilt away , in
fact, years back when it first started we almost never had more than 20 posts
per day. That compared to several hundred per day during this past snow season.
Anyone that did not like the moderated environment could continue to post
there. Granted, if ne.weather.moderated was wildly successful, there would be
far less discussion (on ne.weather), but always, I am quite confident, there
will be professionals, like myself that review the group to answer any
questions regarding the weather that may come up.
As for content, you are absolutely right, there will be a lot of meaningless
talk about busted forecasts, and that is important to some posters to vent. It
is not the intention of this group to create a moderated group that would
eliminate the natural enthusiasm of the public, whether it be silly and
deterring somewhat to the pros, or not. The intention of the group is just as
stated in the faq to promote a friendly environment, one which is more
comfortable to post without fear of being targeted by individuals for their
enjoyment.
In sum, I do acknowledge the possibility of ne.weather becoming less frequented
if ne.weather.moderated is successful. That is a good thing based on a
hopefully successful formula, and is not the intention, but instead the
*byproduct* of this hopefully productive group.
Todd Gross
WHDH-TV
WXAMERICA
I agree wholeheartedly with Joshua Lindstrom's comments concerning the creation
of ne.weather moderated
Best Regards
Larry Cosgrove
Steve B
I am in favor of the moderated group for sure. I agree with Todd and
will likely continue to post at times to ne.weather at times as well. It
wasn't that bad back in 97 when I first began posting. Not sure what
happened over the years. Regardless, you have my support with the new group.
Sincerely,
Steve
"Joshua Lindstrom" <net...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3B3B65B0...@sympatico.ca...
GaryM
news:wQT_6.1539$H7.7...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com:
I am not in favour of the group.
My main thoughts are:
1. I feel it is being created in reaction to a few trouble
makers that exist in every USENET forum (list the names, I doubt
you will have more than 5).
2. Regular posters who I respect and enjoy also have shown a
tendancy to violate the charter (because they are human and
react differently to criticism and other stimuli) and could be
locked out, maybe permanently, as I read it.
3. The people I allude to in 1 will not go away in the new
group. If they want to disrupt it, they will (and they do!).
This is actually accepted in the charter and we have seen how
easy identity faking is. This nullifies any thought of banning
folks.
4. If the weather pros all go to ne.weather.moderated it may
mean the end of ne.weather (esp due to no x-posting). This would
mean there would be a de facto imposition of a few people's
opinions on everyone else. I know this would be unintentional,
but it is the consequence, not the cause, I am worried about.
OK, NEWM does not have to comply with the constitution, I am not
confused, but if creating it effectively kills another forum, it
is not good.
5. Weather is so much a matter of opinion that differences
between forecasters are normal -- the extent to which they
differ is inversely proportional to the distance in time from
the event being forecasted :) . Therefore, a natural tension
will exist among forecasters and the "relaxed, cordial manner"
as stated in the charter is an unattainable goal.
In summary, I vote against, because I doubt its practicality and
I am concerned with its effect on the existing group.
Good luck to all,
--
Gary
(Modify email address before replying)
"If everyone thinks the same way, then someone's not thinking" -
Gen George S. Patten.
Robert B. Mandell
back on to the New England Weather newsgroup. And I think this will be THE
group! Let us know as soon as we can sign on/in.
Best Regards, Bob
Robert B. Mandell, Ph.D.
Tufts University
R.MA...@tufts.edu
Jeff Rudacille
Friday, June 29, 2001
By Dennis B. Roddy, Post-Gazette Staff Writer
Jim Ellis, who set out to connect a handful of computers so they could share
technical data and created a precursor to the modern Internet, died of
cancer yesterday at his home in Harmony, Beaver County. He was 45.
His death was announced by the family in an e-mail -- something he helped
make possible when he created Usenet, the first openly available computer
network that burgeoned into a worldwide mosaic that is now the backbone of
the information age.
He moved to Western Pennsylvania 15 years ago to work at the Super Computing
Center in Oakland. Later, he worked for the Computer Emergency Response
Team. He spent the end of his career telecommuting to work a continent away
at Sun Microsystems in California.
Neither Mr. Ellis nor his co-inventors made a cent on their creation, which
ushered in the era of e-mail, Internet discussion groups and an information
explosion that continues to grow exponentially.
It was 1979 when Mr. Ellis and a fellow Duke University student, Tom
Truscott, decided to use e-mail programs and university computers to
establish what were, essentially, electronic bulletin boards to which any
member could post items using computer modems and telephone lines.
"Our estimate was one to two articles a day and from 50 to 100 computers
maximum," recalled Steve Bellovin, an AT&T researcher who helped draw up
plans for the network in 1979.
Today, there are now more than 50,000 Usenet news and discussion groups, and
there are too many computers linked to the system to count.
Born in Nashville, Tenn., James Tice Ellis, grew up in Orlando, Fla. He was,
in his early years, famously shy.
In college, he took a summer job as a tour guide on the Jungle Cruise
attraction at Disney World, which required constant talking, mugging and
banter.
"He was scared to death to speak in public," said his wife, Carolyn. "He
found out he was good at it. It really helped to bring him out of his
shell."
At Duke, Mr. Ellis was a physics major, but found himself spending countless
hours in the computer laboratory.
"He was a great visionary of how the Net was to be used," said Tom
Longstaff, a longtime friend and colleague. "His biggest accomplishments
were always the interaction between technology and society."
At the time Usenet was conceived, the assemblage of interconnected
government computers -- the Advanced Research Projects Agency net -- was
open only to government researchers and contractors. Mr. Ellis, Truscott,
Bellovin and a fourth researcher, Stephen Daniel, set up their system by
having university and nongovernmental computers shift data over phone lines
in the evenings, allowing individual users to log on and post their ideas.
Mr. Ellis presented the full concept of Usenet at a 1980 conference in
Boulder, Colo., where 80 copies of a printed "Invitation to a General Access
Unix Network" were snatched up by the 400 attendees.
"Sadly, I don't think any of these have survived," Ellis wrote 11 years
later.
He remembered the audience was especially fascinated by his description of a
"home brewed" auto-dialer Duke had hooked up, moving at a startling 300
baud. Today's basic modems connect at 56,000 baud, although most heavy
Internet traffic flows over cable lines.
"Whoever was willing to call you at night and download all these messages
was part of Usenet," said Carolyn Ellis. "They just sat back and gawked at
how it grew."
It grew, primarily, because Mr. Ellis' concept was at once ambitious and
simple: every computer was equal in strength on the system, and anyone with
a modem could get on.
"It was designed not to be just for the geeks, but to be for an average
person who had something to say," Longstaff said.
Mr. Ellis, in a recollection posted on a Usenet archive, recalled how "we
felt we needed to get across the idea that Usenet was already a
fully-functioning, nonlocal network rather than the patchwork . . . that
really existed."
Usenet's original configuration linked three computers -- two at Duke and
one at the University of North Carolina's Chapel Hill campus, about 10 miles
away. Later, those computers linked with others at Bell Laboratories, the
University of California at Berkeley and Reed College in Oregon.
Initially, the idea of information shared over computers was unsettling to
some. The FBI, interested in participating, had Usenet messages recorded
onto rolls of magnetic tape, then shipped to its computer system, rather
than logging on.
Mr. Ellis said the Bell computer was code-named "Research" because the
researcher there who arranged the link to Usenet feared Bell management
wouldn't like the idea.
Nervousness about the connections, Mr. Ellis said, sometimes resulted in
bizarre connections.
"One of the worst examples was that Tektronix, in Oregon, couldn't send
e-mail to some other site a local phone call away because it was against
policy to set up the connection. But they could, and did, send mail via
Berkeley/Research/Duke going cross-country twice to reach [a member who was]
a local phone call away," Ellis wrote.
After two years without direct connection to ARPA net, a technician at
Berkeley matter-of-factly connected the system to Usenet, and the Internet
as it is known today took shape.
That technician, Mark Horton, interviewed by author Ronda Hauben for her
book "Netizens," recalled his own amazement when e-mails he had sent to the
East Coast would be answered within hours.
Mr. Ellis and Truscott were later honored by the Electronic Frontier
Foundation, a Washington-based lobbying arm for the computer and Internet
industry. Their award conferred official credit for the creation of Usenet
and its contribution to the creation of worldwide electronic communications.
By then, Mr. Ellis had moved on to specialize in network security.
Co-workers at CERT recalled him playing an important role in lobbying the
makers of anti-virus computer software to give away updates -- called
"patches" on the Internet -- rather than trying to sell them to consumers
who had already bought the product.
"He basically changed the way we all deal with security on a network,"
Longstaff said.
With his wife, Mr. Ellis also became active in the League of Women Voters.
The two served as co-presidents of the North Hills chapter, and Mr. Ellis
oversaw the introduction of the League of Women Voters of Greater
Pittsburgh's voters guide online and chaired the chapters "cyber committee."
In addition to his wife, Mr. Ellis is survived by a daughter, Laura; a son,
Allen; and his parents, Henry and Elsa Ellis of Orlando.
The funeral will be held at 3 p.m. tomorrow at Camp Run United Presbyterian
Church, Fombell. Donations are requested for the Cure for Lymphoma
Foundation, 215 Lexington Ave., New York, NY 10016.
Ryan Hanrahan
Todd Gross) I speak for the rest of the management of the channel and many
of its members in saying that we completely support and back the creation of
ne.weather.moderated.
In past years, ne.weather and #neweather have worked in tandem as two of the
northeast's finest weather forums and discussions. These groups have had a
very important influence on helping create an interest in meteorology amoung
many, and have been excellent tools for discussion even frequented by
meteorologists from TV and the NWS. These forums are also extremely
educational and have taught me SO much about the science of meteorology.
(I'll hopefully be attending University of Oklahoma in the Fall of 2002 :))
ne.weather's decline has been most unfortanate due to several posters who
have posted out of control. The days of arguing about a hurricanes exact
location (to the tenth of a degree, mind you) have passed and have been
replaced with fights including racial slurs and other bigoted and
exceptionally rude/unacceptable comments.
Many great posters of ne.weather have abandoned it because of the rampant
abuse/misuse of the newsgroup and this has been also very unfortanate. I
agree, the only way to possibly save this newsgroup is by putting a stop to
the abusive posting/posters that have caused many problems primarily in the
past few years.
Lets change ne.weather for the better...we have nothing to lose!
Ryan Hanrahan
High School Senior
Channel Manager #neweather
Guilford, CT
Robert B. Mandell <l...@quicksurfer.com> wrote in message
news:9higsm$uo7$1...@news.chatlink.com...
Concerned Weather Fan
the charter that are supposed to be "banned" from this group are very
representative of how you act in chat. Many give you leeway because of your
age and immaturity, but you are just downright nasty to people who either
don't agree with you or say something you perceive as "stupid". This is by
no means an attack on you, rather it is questioning how you can have the
guts to come on here and vote yes for a moderated group when people like you
are why some don't want a moderated group.
To each their own and you are who you are, but if there is a moderated group
it is meant to weed out people who act like you do.
"Ryan Hanrahan" <ryan.h...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9hj9ba$2p0$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
The Stormdesk
>put their original posts in each group? The charter/faq already says that
>cross posting is not allowed, so a poster can not put both groups in his
>post...so he/she would have to take the time to post something they feel
>important to both groups. Do not think it will happen...I think the group
>that "win's out" will draw most posters/readers while the other group will
>wilt away.
>
I am very much in favor of having ne.weather.moderated. It would be so
refreshing to dialogue on the amazing dynamics of weather once again and
finally avoid the self serving personal ego posts so common lately on
ne.weather. Also, I would like to mention that when there is heavy weather
moving in, or a weather phenomena occurring in the wee hours, I would still
check the old ne.weather to see what others may be thinking. As much as I look
forward to ne.weather.moderated, I'm glad the old ne.weather will still be
there during those times when the situation is so severe that all of us are too
freaked to argue! :>) But current severe/unusual weather aside, I very much
look forward to a moderated forum that can once again be recommended as a
learning source to others interested in weather. As a hobbyist, ne.weather has
been an amazing insight to all the tools available online, and to also help in
understanding weather better.
Best Regards!
Kyle.
Jaison Stein
nice to have a friendly atmosphere, instead of all the flamming going on.
Thanks.
Hooper69
is definately the need for a moderated group. It will be much more successful
in allowing people to share their thoughts in a safe and respectful
environment. The weather folks of the northeast and New England deserve a haven
where open-mindedness is reality and where attacks on others is not
acknowledged. It's time to take Josh's idea to the next step and create
ne.weather moderated.
Thankyou
Peter Clark
Donald Rosenfeld
Eric Medeiros
Not as group that would serve to replace any *other* area, but as forum that
would serve an alternative to those that already exsist and will continue
to.
I wholeheartly support any forum that I would be able to recommend,
without any hesitation, to both viewers and student groups. It is my hope,
that the new group, will attempt maintain a stable and civil atmosphere, one
that doesn't degenerate into a forum of personal attacks, obscene language,
and otherwise inappropriate behavior.
I support the creation of ne.weather.moderated
-Eric
--
*************************************************************
Eric Medeiros
Metronews Meteorologist
Mede...@hotmail.com
"the words we mean most, are those we never say"
"Tony Cristaldi" <blown2sm...@quancon.com> wrote in message
news:g9smjto70l1vsgrp3...@4ax.com...
>
> I echo Josh's thoughts, and look forward to the creation of NE.W.M
> where one can participate in thought provoking weather discussions
> without having to sift through posts and comments that denigrate the
> otherwise friendly spirit of the NG.
>
> Tony Cristaldi
> NWS Melbourne FL
Steve Pearsall
I also think that the time has come for NEWM and look forward to its
creation. Maybe we will see the return of some high quality participants
like Gary Gray and others who stopped participating in ne.weather.
Jeff Rudacille
declared winter over in February. If I do that, I might lose some respect
and get chided, but when a professional Met does it, he is playing with his
profession and lively hood. Gary might be a heck of a person, but last year
he was just plain bad and would have brought little to this group that was
not already present. (Except for may some laughs in his "ever changing,
multiglowing, accumulation board. One storm it changed 7 times in 24
hours!!!)
I laugh when people put down NE.weather...it is one of (if not THE MOST)
knowledgeable group of weather weenies around the internet. Everyone is
always welcome with opinions, but I am starting to get a tad upset at these
continued accusations that ne.weather is no longer valuable and the only way
to fix it is get back the valuable people.
"Steve Pearsall" <spearsal...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:kX707.142$2n3....@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Cumulonimbus Calvus Praecipitatio
>Maybe we will see the return of some high quality participants
>like Gary Gray and others who stopped participating in ne.weather.
Not to single you out Steve...but...with regard to the oft repeated statements
about 'quality participants' and 'professional meteorologists' who used to post
to Ne.Wx but who do no longer...where does this conclusion come from? How do
you, or anyone else for that matter, know why certain people no longer post to
Ne.Wx? I don/t recall reading any 'I won/t be posting to Ne.Wx anymore b/c you
don/t treat me like the omnipotent Wx God I know I am' farewell posts, other
than from Simard.
FOTMI, 'quality participants' and 'professional meteorologists' have much
thicker skin. It goes with the job.
---
- T Q -
Start every day off with a smile and get it over with.
-- W.C. Fields --
Charles Demas
Cumulonimbus Calvus Praecipitatio <tower...@aol.com.TSRAGR> wrote:
>>Steve Pearsall"
>
>>Maybe we will see the return of some high quality participants
>>like Gary Gray and others who stopped participating in ne.weather.
>
>Not to single you out Steve...but...with regard to the oft repeated statements
>about 'quality participants' and 'professional meteorologists' who used to post
>to Ne.Wx but who do no longer...where does this conclusion come from?
Gee, create a hostile environment and people don't choose to go
there. This ain't so hard to understand, is it???
>How do
>you, or anyone else for that matter, know why certain people no longer post to
>Ne.Wx?
Maybe some have asked then when they saw them in RL.
>I don/t recall reading any 'I won/t be posting to Ne.Wx anymore b/c you
>don/t treat me like the omnipotent Wx God I know I am' farewell posts, other
>than from Simard.
>
So, you need other examples?
I'll wager that Simard's post was met with derision, encouraging
others to also say why they are leaving.
If a restaurant changes it's ambiance, allowing loud drunks and
fighting, some people will stop going there, even if the food is
good and the prices are reasonable.
Someone will see the opportunity to open a restaurant where the
same type food is served and the ambiance is non-threatening.
They might call the restaurant ne.weather.moderated but probably
would choose a different name. :-)
>FOTMI, 'quality participants' and 'professional meteorologists' have much
>thicker skin. It goes with the job.
Yeah, but when they go out to eat after work, I bet they choose
someplace other than a biker bar.
Chuck Demas
--
Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all,
Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well,
Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it.
de...@tiac.net | \___/ | http://www.tiac.net/users/demas
Jeff Rudacille
public based weather board in the NE United States as best I can tell.
Donald Rosenfeld
Martin Hannigan
Donald Rosenfeld <rose...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas+group:ne.weather&num=100&hl=en&safe=off&scoring=d&rnum=3&ic=1&selm=36DC0AD8.26FAFA48%40mediaone.net
>
Hehe. Demas sure ain't as bad as Milosevic!
-M
Donald Rosenfeld
Donald Rosenfeld
Donald Rosenfeld
Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
> In article <3B41DDA2...@mediaone.net>,
> Donald Rosenfeld <rose...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=1&ic=1&selm=Ftqx8n.5pJ%40world.std.com
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=3&ic=1&selm=83oscb%243q9%40news-central.tiac.net
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=4&ic=1&selm=36137061.1076784%40news.alt.net
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=9&ic=1&selm=FsyxJE.147%40world.std.com
>
> Hey not for nothing, but is there a point related to ne.wx or .moderated?
> Followups set to alt.flame
>
> -M
Donald Rosenfeld
Kozierok and Demas go way back togeather. Both agree on most
subjects (if not all). So, when you read Demas you have insight
to Charles.
Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
> In article <3B41DDA2...@mediaone.net>,
> Donald Rosenfeld <rose...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=1&ic=1&selm=Ftqx8n.5pJ%40world.std.com
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=3&ic=1&selm=83oscb%243q9%40news-central.tiac.net
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=4&ic=1&selm=36137061.1076784%40news.alt.net
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas&hl=en&group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet&safe=off&rnum=9&ic=1&selm=FsyxJE.147%40world.std.com
>
> Hey not for nothing, but is there a point related to ne.wx or .moderated?
> Followups set to alt.flame
>
> -M
>
> >
Charles Demas
Donald Rosenfeld <rose...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=demas+group:ne.weather&num=100&hl=en&safe=off&scoring=d&rnum=3&ic=1&selm=36DC0AD8.26FAFA48%40mediaone.net
FYI, I do not read ne.weather, but I do read posts in other ne.*
newsgroups, and if you looked at my post you'd see that it was
probably crossposted to ne.general and ne.weather. I read ne.general.
I post in ne.general.
So, when someone follows up a crosspost only in ne.weather, I don't
see it, and I don't respond.
That is why I didn't respond. Not really that interesting why I
didn't respond, is it?
Donald Rosenfeld
Charles Demas
Donald Rosenfeld <rose...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>Martin Hannigan wrote:
>>
>> Hey not for nothing, but is there a point related to ne.wx or
>> .moderated?
>
>
>Kozierok and Demas go way back togeather. Both agree on most
>subjects (if not all). So, when you read Demas you have insight
>to Charles.
Well, that's news to me! Now Marty and I go much farther back,
maybe 5 years, when Marty worked for TIAC and I was a TIAC user.
AFAIK, Charles Kozierok only recently started posting to ne.general
and alt.food.sushi (in the last 6 months). Before that, I never
noticed him, if he was there. He might post in ne.food, or
ne.politics, or ne.internet services. I really don't know, or
care much.
I really don't read him much, mostly because he's longwinded and
IMO uninteresting (Sorry Charlie). FWIW, he and Mary Malmros
argue quite a bit, and I would side with Mary much more often
than Charles.
AFAIK, Charles is not a regular in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
but I am a regular there and news.admin.net-abuse.policy.
Charles K. doesn't post in the comp.* newsgroups I do,
comp.unix.questions, comp.unix.shell, or comp.lang.awk
I think he may be more into PC's and Windows rather than Unix.
So, the only association I see is that we both like eating
sushi, and even then, he's not a member of the Boston Sushi Society,
which both Mary and I are.
Please try harder. :-)
Donald Rosenfeld
Alan Grossberg
"Jeff Rudacille" <bub...@epix.net> wrote in message
news:EUh07.572$uM4.8...@news1.epix.net...
> It is sad that people look at ne.weather in this light. It is the premier
> public based weather board in the NE United States as best I can tell.
Have you read sci.geo.meteorology? Seems pretty good.
rave...@paonline.com
<net...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> I vote for the ne.weather.moderated to be brought on board the choice of
> newsgroups!!!!!
I lurk for the mospart on newsgroups, but if I had a vote when
the time comes I would vote a resounding 'Yes!!!' Let there be
ne.weather.moderated.
Jeff Young
Middletown, PA
Charles Demas
Steve Pearsall
> knowledgeable group of weather weenies around the internet. Everyone is
> always welcome with opinions, but I am starting to get a tad upset at
these
> continued accusations that ne.weather is no longer valuable and the only
way
> to fix it is get back the valuable people.
I based my comments purely on my recollection of what the group was like
circa 1996. Although Gary is the only one whose name I recall I know there
were other frequent very informative posters who no longer visit the group.
It seems to me that Larry Cosgrove and Todd Gross posted quite a bit more
often back then as well. But the main thing I'll say is back then I used to
look forward to reading that newgroup everyday in the winter watch for every
chance for a storm. The newsgroup has degenerated to such a state now that
I don't read it much from somewhere in December until March or so unless
there is a big storm approching and I have the time to carefully pick
through the off topic posts and flames (often with on topic headers).
I can remember when ne.weather was a friendly place where a novice could
make a forecast based on his or her interpetation of the models or whatever
and receive friendly and constructive guidance about their forecasts.
Now-a-days if you did something like that you would need a 2 inch thick
asbestos suit to survive the flames and personal insults it would generate.
And I don't buy the crap about "that's the usenet get used to it." The
usenet is exactly what its users allow it to become. ne.weather has turned
into a free for all group where, in the winter when activity really picks
up, flames, insults and off topic posts are all considered acceptable
behavior. While that may not bother you and others it does both a
significant portion of its users. We want a place where off topic posts and
personal insults aren't going to be tolerated.
Whats wrong with us creating a discussion group that serves our needs better
than the current group? No one is going to be forced to go to
ne.weather.moderated. If you like the chaotic atmosphere of ne.weather you
can go there, no one is trying to stop you.
Why do you want to convince us that we shouldn't create a space that suits
our needs better than ne.weather ?
Why shouldn't we be able to discuss the north east's weather in a place free
from personal insults and off topic posts about sports teams and politics ?