Spann did a very poor job of expressing the uncertainty of Irma's track. He had some training or a meeting lately and they told him to dumb everything down for the general public. It shows. So, forget probabilities and uncertainties. His job is to reassure the idiots that constantly ask: Can I drive from X place to Y place at 2:37PM? He didn't want to say its a 95% chance that Alabama won't be impacted and then update his probability as the new forecasts shifted west over several days. Why? Because he didn't want the hassle the general public bring.
It is no longer about giving a skilled forecast with nuance. For the general public it's either you got it 100% right or 100% wrong. If you were 5% off you are WRONG to them. They'll never be happy. Spann is far from the best technical met, but the reason so many of us used to like him was that he was good at his job and didn't make things too complicated or too simple. The past 4-5 years he has been obsessed with making a forecast and sticking to it no matter what contrary evidence came up later. This shift to "good side/bad side" is ridiculous. The average dimwit that cannot understand margin of error and the NHC cone isn't going to comprehend good or bad sides either.
Mets should relay warnings and the forecast to the best of their ability. If you want to be a social scientist that is focused on motivating the stupidest people in your DMA to prepare/protect themselves then go right ahead. But, know that you are essentially becoming the Patron Saint of Lost Causes.
If Spann hadn't become so arrogant that he believes he's got to give personal "IT'S GON RAIN" forecasts to every mouth-breather in Talladega, or they will drown in an inch of water, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. You want the fame and adulation? Then you get to deal with R.J. Smuckins Jr. from Sumiton.