Positive Weather Solutions Have A Dig At Netweather

[Summer Sun]

Make what you will of this,

Background Chatter and Probity.

Usually here at PWS we try to do our thing and provide accurate services to both business and the public. PWS is one of such a handful of independent organisations based in the UK, with whom by and large we peacefully co-exist in accordance with the praxis and protocols of the 21^st century marketplace.

At times we will have private – occasionally public – exchanges with other organisations, usually on scientific matters, or concerning issues of common commercial interest.

It has come to our attention that one such independent organisation has been ‘saying stuff’ about PWS via its online forum. The fact that fora are open means that opinions can be shared across the public domain.

PWS of course accepts that any party may offer a criticism of what we do, but when the forum editor happens to belong to a competitor organisation itself then we justifiably take offence: Dissing other companies does not reflect very well on your corporate identity, and consumers are generally not impressed. Moreover the organisation in question is struggling to emerge from one of the worst seasonal forecasts ever made public: It suggested that the summer would be reminiscent of 1976… In your dreams!

The opinion expressed specifically concerns our ‘reliability’ regarding the upcoming winter forecast. Well, we have not issued a winter forecast yet! What we do make available is the output of our ‘extreme machine’ that looks more than half a year into the future and gives its own verdict. This information is raw and not moderated by us. It provides a guide. Yes, back in late spring the extreme machine was showing a generally cold winter – to an extent that may still be the case. However please expect our Wintercast to feature all the subtleties that our customers would expect of a PWS seasonal forecast for the British Isles: Wintercast 10/11 and Summercast 2011 were both generally accurate – and in advance of those of our competitors.

Many of you will have seen media articles about a cold spell of autumn weather being the harbinger of heaven-only-knows what mother-of-all-winters… That is of course the opinion of the forecasters - and the responsibility of the news organisations who communicate such views.

Enough! Please, please enjoy this fabulous few days of wonderful early autumn weather that is about to unfold. Absolutely lush.

Ray Anthony

Chief Assistant Weather Forecaster

Tuesday September 27th 2011

Disclaimer. The opinions expressed by the above forecaster are not necessarily those of Positive Weather Solutions.

http://www.positivew...and-Probity.php

Edited September 27, 2011 by Gavin D

[Radiating Dendrite]

Make what you will of this,

http://www.positivew...and-Probity.php

Erm...........I think he may be talking about us!

Maybe we should refer to PWS as "you know who" in future discussions!

I have to admit, that is a pretty pathetic post.

[Aaron]

Oh no she did-unt.

[shedhead]

If Netweather the organisation have, as he puts it been 'dissing PWS' then he has a fair point. That certainly appears to be his contention, whether it is actually the case though I don't know.

[Paul]

Lol, well I can definitely say that as an organisation we've not knowingly 'dissed' PWS or indeed any other weather co. Hands up, I jokingly laughed a month or so back when there was talk of a 38% risk of a white Xmas in a forecast but that was just my (light hearted and since deleted) opinion. Beyond that I can't see anything to warrant the above, and the only mention of winter forecasts I can see is in this thread:

http://forum.netweat...2/page__st__380

It's certainly not our style to get into flame wars with any other company - we prefer to spend our time concentrating on our business and that's what we'll keep doing!

[UV-RAY]

Tin hats on and head for the bunkers.............Weather wars!!!

[Coast]

Erm...........I think he may be talking about us!

[bobbydog]

Netweather sends apology to PWS

[Lancashire Lass]

Seriously? Maybe he'd have been better not saying anything at all? The above comment comes across as slightly childish to be honest. Maybe he needs to heed his own advice and leave it at that.

[shedhead]

Lol, well I can definitely say that as an organisation we've not knowingly dissed PWS or indeed any other weather co. Hands up, I jokingly laughed a month or so back when there was talk of a 38% risk of a white Xmas in a forecast but that was just my (light hearted and since deleted) opinion. Beyond that I can't see anything to warrant the above, and the only mention of winter forecasts I can see is in this thread:

http://forum.netweat...2/page__st__380

It's certainly not our style to get into flame wars with any other company - we prefer to spend our time concentrating on our business and that's what we'll keep doing!

It certainly looks like a case of sour grapes on Mr Anthonys behalf, who if you notice takes personal claim for the e-mail and in so doing distances himself from PWS - which is a rather cowardly way to go about things in my opinion.

On the other hand, individual members have a perfect right to ctitisise other forecasting organisations through the medium of the NW forum, as long as the critisism is (at least to a degree) constructive and not abusive of course. However with all due respect Paul, I have seen posts from senior members of NW directed at Corbyn, which fail miserably to meet these objectives.

Edited September 27, 2011 by shedhead

[Paul]

I've not seen the posts you're referring to, but it's important to clarify that the forum team aren't employees of Netweather, and don't represent the views of netweather, they're unpaid volunteers who offer their time to help out the community on here.

That said, whether it be a forum team member or a normal member if someone is saying something out of order (in any context), reporting the post or contacting us direct via the contact links on the site will bring it to our attention and the issue will be dealt with.

[shedhead]

I've not seen the posts you're referring to, but it's important to clarify that the forum team aren't employees of Netweather, and don't represent the views of netweather, they're unpaid volunteers who offer their time to help out the community on here.

That said, whether it be a forum team member or a normal member if someone is saying something out of order (in any context), reporting the post or contacting us direct via the contact links on the site will bring it to our attention and the issue will be dealt with.

That is very fair and reasonable. However, I'm pretty sure there was once a whole thread on here dedicated to PC, which saw him called all sorts of things from con man to charlatan, the latter by a very senior member of the forum. Whilst you are quite right to take no responsibilty for individual comments, either from forum moderators or members, once threads get started with the sole objective of personal critisism mud will begin to stick - at least in my opinion.

[Paul]

I can't find that particular thread and don't recall it tbh (not suggesting it didn't exist but more making the point that it's not possible to view every thread which is why the reporting function is important) - perhaps the fact it doesn't appear to be on here any more suggests it was already removed by a member of the team?

Like I say - the report function and various methods of contact are available to discuss individual posts/threads etc etc, which anyone and everyone is free to use to bring things to our attention, ask questions or provide feedback.

[shedhead]

We are drifting rather off topic here, but FYI someone drew PC's attention to it earlier this year on his site comments section. No individuals names were mentioned, but NW certainly was.

http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=315&c=5

[SP1986]

PWS certainly aren't covering themselves in any professionality with that article. Smacks of a baby throwing its toys out of the pram, and if that comes across as offensive then, it's probably reinforcing my opinion.

I have seen people have a go at PWS for their attempt forecast/outlook attempts, but if you make a forecast well in advance you have to be prepared to take the criticism.

[Paul]

There's a difference between 'Netweather' having an opinion & someone who is a member (or indeed an 'inhabitant') of the netweather forum having an opinion - I think that differentiation is quite important and one I know the vast majority of people understand.

And as I've said more than once - if anyone has an issue with the contents of any post / thread on here there are numerous ways to bring that to our attention.

[weathe20]

Problem is, as this is a public forum I wonder how many PWS employees are actually members here...probably a few.

[Radiating Dendrite]

Problem is, as this is a public forum I wonder how many PWS employees are actually members here...probably a few.

The enemy within!

[johnholmes]

Its very easy to get uptight about lrf forecasts and some other organisations. The 'senior member' referred to may well have been me. I do have over 20 years experience of professional weather forecasting but that is not an excuse if anyone feels, if it was me, it was OTT then I apologise.

But I have yet to be convinced that Piers has a solid meteorological foundation. I find now as when I was a professional forecaster that the best approach is say nowt when its right, and put your hand up when its wrong. Your customers soon work out whether you are good enough to continue paying for your service.

Is not the BBC going to run a check on forecasts in the near future from a variety of organisations? Perhaps that will show which forecast outlets let their forecasts do the talking rather than spokespersons making media comment about others?

[shedhead]

Its very easy to get uptight about lrf forecasts and some other organisations. The 'senior member' referred to may well have been me. I do have over 20 years experience of professional weather forecasting but that is not an excuse if anyone feels, if it was me, it was OTT then I apologise.

But I have yet to be convinced that Piers has a solid meteorological foundation. I find now as when I was a professional forecaster that the best approach is say nowt when its right, and put your hand up when its wrong. Your customers soon work out whether you are good enough to continue paying for your service.

Is not the BBC going to run a check on forecasts in the near future from a variety of organisations? Perhaps that will show which forecast outlets let their forecasts do the talking rather than spokespersons making media comment about others?

I think it's also very easy to get down on certain firms and individuals, PC being an excellent case in point... if ever the marmite anology applied anywhere...

From a personal perspective I have little or no time at all for him or his methodology, that said however I'd never use the kind of language highlighted previously in this thread, indeed if he winds some folk up that much it's probably better for the blood pressure to ignore him completely.

[Pennine Ten Foot Drifts]

I can't find that particular thread and don't recall it tbh (not suggesting it didn't exist but more making the point that it's not possible to view every thread which is why the reporting function is important) - perhaps the fact it doesn't appear to be on here any more suggests it was already removed by a member of the team?

Like I say - the report function and various methods of contact are available to discuss individual posts/threads etc etc, which anyone and everyone is free to use to bring things to our attention, ask questions or provide feedback.

I think it's probably this one:

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/66081-piers-corbyns-winter-forecast-201011/page__st__96

The problem/difficulty in criticising PC is that whilst I can think of many examples of him forecasting 'super storm' this and 'record breaking' that which failed to materialise, he also inserts enough generalisations and vagaries into each overall LRF that it allows him enough scope to claim tenuous successes just about every time. Now that may not be particularly scientific but it is certainly quite clever and skilful in it's own way. And like most quasi-religious followers, his disciples seem adept at ignoring the failures and concentrating solely on the 'successes'.

[ForeverPomeroysnow]

What next drive by dirty looks?

I can see it now John Holmes leading us with an inspirational speech, blue make up on and wearing a kilt

"they may take our LRFs, they may take our CET guessing but they will never take our FREEDOM (or our winter 20011/12 thread)

[Paul]

Thanks, I've hidden that for now and will have a proper read through when I have a mo.

[shedhead]

I think it's probably this one:

http://forum.netweat...11/page__st__96

The problem/difficulty in criticising PC is that whilst I can think of many examples of him forecasting 'super storm' this and 'record breaking' that which failed to materialise, he also inserts enough generalisations and vagaries into each overall LRF that it allows him enough scope to claim tenuous successes just about every time. Now that may not be particularly scientific but it is certainly quite clever and skilful in it's own way. And like most quasi-religious followers, his disciples seem adept at ignoring the failures and concentrating solely on the 'successes'.

Indeed, that was the offending thread, irrespective of the politics I'm not sure it showed this place in a particularly good light. Looking at the comments on PC's site I think he'd probably saw the thread at the time, so it must be said that if he did he took the brickbats contained therein very well - all the years of critisism and derision have probably left him with a pretty thick skin....

[Fozfoster]

Tin hats on and head for the bunkers.............Weather wars!!!

Or weathergate.