Model Output Discussion - Your Thoughts

[Serendipity]

To be honest, chances are your contributions would be far more welcome in there than the "will it snow? will it not? despair!" stuff.

Keep on coming with the ideas- I am noticing some common themes here, and some interesting suggestions.

Oh I somehow doubt it, I'm just a lowly housewife with a bizarre obsession with the weather. My ramblings would be most incoherant I am sure! But having been a member of this site for many years, I find the contributions and posts by some members to be invaluable and would love a more succinct forum that I could browse to get an overview of what those with more experience are thinking with regard to the latest runs.

Maybe you need a netweather hierarchy with VIP posters only allowed to post on certain threads

*runs for cover*

Edited December 4, 2009 by Serendipity

[cyclonic happiness]

Oh I somehow doubt it, I'm just a lowly housewife with a bizarre obsession with the weather. My ramblings would be most incoherant I am sure! But having been a member of this site for many years, I find the contributions and posts by some members to be invaluable and would love a more succinct forum that I could browse to get an overview of what those with more experience are thinking with regard to the latest runs.

Maybe you need a netweather hierarchy with VIP posters only allowed to post on certain threads

*runs for cover*

GET HER!!!!!

[Typhoon John]

Paul,

Have you considered opening up 4 threads. One each for 0Z, 6Z, 12Z and 18Z runs. Alongside this could run a general model discussion thread. This way comments on particular runs are kept away from the overall direction headed.

c

(You wouldn't need a new thread for each day - just restart the right timed thread when the models are run at that daily time).

I like that idea, but I'd be more inclined to call general model discussion something like model trends or long range analysis and have it as a view of the models encompassing other factors.

Big upcoming weather events (heavy snow, flooding, heatwaves) should then have their own discussion thread. Today's weather and general chat should be for the short term views at all other times.

And, not that I could do it, but I think it would be cool to have threads for reanalysis of significant events such as the flooding in the North West last month and the factors that conspired to create the conditions.

[Typhoon John]

Wow I really killed this thread.

Or maybe it was the GFS Easterly!

[ChartViewer]

Paul,

Well done for opening up this debate and an opportunity for everyone to discuss this. I think there is a need for a split between Technical Model analysis as some are much more clued up about Teleconnections, Model output and analysis than others who just want to watch run on run especially in Winter and comment. and bascally have fun.

I dont know what the answer is but this Site is fantastic and you listen so well done Netweather :lol:

Regards

Rob

[Paul]

Thanks for all the opinions and feedback so far - I think it's reasonable to say that the majority would like to have 2 (or more) separate threads, with the devil being in the detail of how we do that.

Please keep the thoughts coming!!

[I remember Atlantic 252]

I think there should be 2 model threads one for technical scientific posts, like GP etc, and one for general non scientific model discussion, whining, excitement etc, like oh crap! thats a bad run in the 2nd example

Ill be very interested in the first example but only post in 2nd example

[nick sussex]

What could be a very big help is to have a link on the model discussion thread to a glossary of common terms used in the discussion, this would IMO be invaluable, for those interested they could read a post and quickly at least be able to get some idea of whats going on.

I think there are many times when some members would like to ask a question about what all these teleconnections mean and how they impact on the weather, but just feel too intimidated so by having this glossary in a quick link would really help.

[KTtom]

Well i've been here since 2005,visit most days although you wouldn't guess by the post count, however I firmly agree with the idea of 2 threads.1 for Up to +144 and 1 for FI...strangely enough, isn't this what BBC tried to do post S-W? ...perhaps not such a good idea then

[HighPressure]

As someone who is not too knowledgeable in reading models I find the model thread as it is, well balanced and reasonable understandable. The novice comment's although a pain to the experts are actually quite helpful to people like me as they often receive a plain English response which helps thickies like me stay on track.

My fear is if you go totally technical, all I will see is GFS, NOAA, ECM, NOGAPS and I will lose it completely as you might just as well be speaking in binary? What would be of help is a glossary popup or as you see on some sites like Wikipedea common terms underlined NOAA and when you ver over them you get a brief explanation bubble appear.

As I say I am in the nearly understand what you are talking about department.

Edited December 4, 2009 by HighPressure

[mcboz]

I never post in the model discussion thread, but do read it every single day. I’ve been a weather enthusiast for a few years now. Although I have a basic understanding of how the models work I wouldn’t call myself a subject matter expert. Therefore I read the discussion thread to ‘top up’ my understanding of what is happening in relation to the latest output. I value posts from forum members who have much more in-depth knowledge than me and I learn something new every day!

As stated above I look for expert opinion in the thread, however, the banter, views, emotion and different characters make it a good discussion on many different levels. In fact, as I’d go as far to relate it to a discussion down the pub between mates all with differing views and knowledge levels!

When a model is coming out the thread functions much in the same way as the BBC live text updates (which are mainly used for sporting events) which is great for us who don’t have the in depth knowledge as others.

I believe one of the reasons the thread is so popular is that it is fast paced, there is always a new post to read!

I think the problem with a model summary thread is that I want to know what is happening now, not in a few hours time.

It’s a tricky one but my suggestions would be:

• Have a model thread for each run, with comments made as it comes out and another thread for more in depth analysis which focuses on trends rather than one particular run
  
• Do nothing – it works for me at the moment
  
• Link more in depth technical analysis to the thread, with only forecasters of a certain knowledge level able to link these posts in
  
• Split the thread in to technical and non technical – I don’t think this works as it means there are two places to look for similar updates / discussions
  
• Have a chat room!?
  
• Have someone do a live model update like the BBC sports website to which users can post comments
  

Overall I think in its current format its good fun with some light hearted humour, but with some real technical knowledge thrown in.

Something not related to this subject – I quite often check the forum on my phone, the design and size of the forum means this isn’t easy (lots of scrolling, loading etc), any chance there could be a cut down version for mobile devices? Only has to be text.

In concussion I think I’d leave it as it is, for now anyway.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

James

[Glacier Point]

How about pinning threads as they do on Eastern USWX ? I'd be happy to contribute to threads which members would be more than welcome to post into alongside the fast running MO thread. Possibly theme related rather than just a 'techie thread'.

[chionomaniac]

One of the things that I would be keen not to see happen would be an elitist thread. I don't think anyone should be excluded from posting into any thread because they are deemed to be not an 'expert' in that field. We are all learning after all!

[wysiwyg]

FWIW I personally think it's fine as it is - I actually think that the broad range of views on the models keep some interest in the thread - I have read the threads as much for entertainment value as for forecasting validity. I know this may not fit the purists view of what the thread should be but I honestly think it's not difficult to sort the quality objective posts from the "wishcasting" as it was so well described in an earlier post

In my view - the netweather team has to decide whether they want this thread to appear "ultra professional" or a wide range of views. I think there is enough quality posting in the restricted forecasters' threads to maintain that professionality without meddling with the model thread. Good moderating will deal with any personality type issues that surface.

So in summary - my vote is keep as is - but for pities sake Announce that FI means Fantasy Island and not formula 1

Edited December 4, 2009 by wysiwyg

[Cookie]

I really miss the model summiers thread that paul B used to do and really think they should be brought back in some form or other. as it was a great thread if you only had few mins to check things online.

so please bring back the model summiers

[swilliam]

For me the model thread is fine and I would not change it. It is a bit annoying reading the one liners like that is a fantastic output but it is easy to skip these.

I do not think an expert thread is a good idea as it would be difficult to know which thread to read so we would end up having to read both. You also have the problem in deciding who or which comments are deemed to be expert with an obvious grey area.

If something was to change then I would vote for two threads looking at different timescales, say before and after t144. This is because when discussing changes or charts in so called FI we immediately get a reply that it is FI anyway so will not verify or that the models are useless at the range. Yes we know that but we like to discuss the general situation and possibble scenarios - some people don't seem to be able to handle that. However the problem with this arises when something interesting is about to happen like we have now. Eventually this will move to the T144 time frame and it will be unclear where posts should be and we will end having to read two threads. In addition of course what happens before t144 affects what happens after.

One improvement I would like to see is that the number of pages that you can one click is expanded beyond three. If you have not been on the thread for a while then more than three pages may have been added. But you either have to skip to the end or three pages at time - could we have say 6 pages shown. Also I would like to have a permanent link to this thread on the home page (maybe underneath the model output links or on the model pages) - if it is not on the selection panel you have to scroll through lots of pages to get to it.

In general though I think the site and thread are excellent.

Stewart

Edited December 4, 2009 by swilliam

[Mark H]

Although i dont post on here very often,the model discussion thread is the first one i look at.

I used to prefer it when there were two threads,the one for general discussion and a technical one where the likes of John Homes,GP,and Steve Murr used to post their thoughts.This saved having to read through xx amount of pages of winters over,general whinging if the models didnt show what we wanted, be it mild or cold etc to eventually get to posts where novices like me can learn and find out from the experts what the models were actually showing.

However as this didnt work last time, i quite like the idea that GP suggests,keeping the general discussion thresd as is with theme related topics along side this started by our experts but open for all to discuss.

[Iceberg]

I think it works as is 90% of the time atm, having two threads will help the 10% of the time that something interesting is happening, but the problem is that leaves 90% of the time I don't think it will work very well and one of the two threads will suffer.

[NorthNorfolkWeather]

Ain't broke so don't fix it… I enjoy the toing and froing and variety of comments. There are some who obviously have an agenda and others who are just weather fans and experts.

I agree completely. Having been on the boards for about a year, there are people, who, if they post, I know will be informative and others that are not.

But that's part of the fun even though some people make me feel

It's a debate, keep it that way

[Paul]

Thanks again for all the feedback and thoughts so far - I think we ought to do this type of thing more often!

The idea of having short/long range model discussions is something that's come up a few times now, and is in fact something we tried a couple of years back. It worked to a degree but got difficult at times as a post where someone may summarise the models or follow a trend through from say 84 --> 168 hours or more wouldn't fit perfectly in either thread. So then wherever it's posted it's likely to result in at least some of the discussion swaying off topic.

Doing something similar to the easternwx boards could well be interesting - just trying to get my head around how it would work - if we were choosing a specific topic today, perhaps it could be 'Tracking the potential cold plunge mid-late December'. Is this the sort of thing you're meaning GP?

[KTtom]

How about having a sub-forum called Snow-Watch

[MP-R]

I haven't read Page 1 and 2 of this thread so apologies if this has already been said but I think it was last year I enjoyed reading the model Output Discussion but also a Model 'Mood' Thread. It was nice to read the formality and serious discussion in the former, and the ranting and true opinions in the latter. With all this up and down between mild westerlies, snowy northerlies and cold easterlies, this would be a great thread to bring back in my opinion.

Regards.

[stewfox]

Ain't broke so don't fix it… I enjoy the toing and froing and variety of comments. There are some who obviously have an agenda and others who are just weather fans and experts.

Given popularity I wouldn't want to try and fix it, the fact there is a bit of latitude I think is all well and good.

No one wants a 'will it snow here'or 'yes he did' ....'no he didnt'', type stuff , but these are often removed.

I dont think asking a model question is wrong (unless you want to spilt and have a model thread just for the advance as well)

In the winter a thread like 'up and coming cold discussion' I think should remain open, which could range from the F1 T384 does that mean it will snow on my house type comment to detailed references to set up in previous years or even the odd model thrown in.

The one thing about this forum is of course it appeals to a very wide age range and probably on that fact alone will require extra moderatoring

An observation re the model thread is it often looks at T144 and beyond and little re upto T72 unless there is a big storm etc , just an observation. It would be interestin to here people take on the period upto T72

Edited December 5, 2009 by stewfox

[jy]

I use this site every day,enjoy it and especially in winter watch with interest the varied weather around the country unfold and all the highs and lows that go with it.

I wonder how many pages would be saved in a winter if many of the following phrases were not used.

That blizzard in F1 looks brilliant but it will never happen,car crash of emotions, pass the prozac,rollercoaster ride,close but no cigar,the form horse,will it snow in Boggington on sea,ect ect actually not as big a go as it may seem,nothing can be done anyway,but it kind of gets in the way thats all,cant remember GP, Mr Holmes,Mr Fish,using said terms.

Anyway not written to cause offence but to perhaps provoke thought before posting thats all.

[phil nw.]

I vote keep it as it is Paul .

As for the one liners and the "will it snow etc?" posts then they should be moderated by the team.

I enjoy this thread and can cope with the few irritations that we get from inconsiderate posts that should go in other threads.

Edited December 5, 2009 by phil n.warks.