• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Misc 2019 Banter & Friendly Conservation

ForsythSnow said:
Honestly I don't even know why we started this early. Last time we did over a week it faded away and became a mess. In addition it's not going to do us any good.
Click to expand...

I started it because people were begging for it. Not sure we have any written rules over when to start it but it would be nice to have it written out. That way everyone would know not to ask before said time...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon
whatalife said:
I started it because people were begging for it. Not sure we have any written rules over when to start it but it would be nice to have it written out. That way everyone would know not to ask before said time...
Click to expand...

When there is support from almost every model on multiple runs of both the deterministic and ensembles for a significant event, a thread should be considered. When almost every post in the monthly thread is model analysis of the potential threat, a storm thread is warranted in my opinion. These things usually happen in the 5-7 day period with the more significant storms. The December storm thread was started even earlier if I remember correctly. If the storm produces for some, that's great. If it doesn't, then there is a dedicated thread we can use to dissect what went wrong. It will be easier to find when someone wants to research it.
 
NoSnowATL said:
3-4 days out seems reasonable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

When the nam kicks in?? Lol

It’s fine to start it today. Models won’t just lose this thing. It might end up not cold enough or something like that, but I doubt it vanishes. The upper SE has strong support on multiple ensemble suites.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Jon said:
When the nam kicks in?? Lol

It’s fine to start it today. Models won’t just lose this thing. It might end up not cold enough or something like that, but I doubt it vanishes. The upper SE has strong support on multiple ensemble suites.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You mean “ Mid South” haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Man I hope areas that didn't get snow further south and west have a chance this time and not just the same areas as last time....
 
This was a great decision to go ahead and start a separate thread because this threat was beginning to dominate the Jan thread thanks to rapidly increasing model support for at least a threat. Once that happens to a monthly thread and we’re within a week, I think it is the best decision. What’s the big harm if it doesn’t materialize? One extra archived thread? At least the Jammin’ Jan thread will be less jammed than would otherwise be the case for those looking back at the Jan thread in the future.
 
First it was punting this same time period saying it’s going to torch and no snow chances/cancel January. Now it’s punting the storm after a thread is started. Let’s just be glad we have something to track after the way Jan has started....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
packfan98 said:
When there is support from almost every model on multiple runs of both the deterministic and ensembles for a significant event, a thread should be considered. When almost every post in the monthly thread is model analysis of the potential threat, a storm thread is warranted in my opinion. These things usually happen in the 5-7 day period with the more significant storms. The December storm thread was started even earlier if I remember correctly. If the storm produces for some, that's great. If it doesn't, then there is a dedicated thread we can use to dissect what went wrong. It will be easier to find when someone wants to research it.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying and I definitely agree with not cluttering the January thread up with one certain storm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NoSnowATL said:
It was sarcasm. I hope y’all guys score. Good luck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thanks. I feel for you and this probably won’t be the system, but with the blocking showing up I bet ATL’s time will come in Feb! Gotta stay hopeful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Jon said:
Thanks. I feel for you and this probably won’t be the system, but with the blocking showing up I bet ATL’s time will come in Feb! Gotta stay hopeful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I’m just glad we can track something, I don’t expect snow every year but it’s just as fun tracking it. Hell I would start a threat 2 weeks out if I could. All good man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon
whatalife said:
Because it’s the one thing we can get right (not). LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Lol I mean I can see not starting threads for 10 day threats. We’d have about a thousand threads. But if the pattern supports something and you have broad model agreement, 5-7 days out should be fine.
 
Rain Cold said:
Lol I mean I can see not starting threads for 10 day threats. We’d have about a thousand threads. But if the pattern supports something and you have broad model agreement, 5-7 days out should be fine.
Click to expand...

I think it’s fine, if you look at who is questioning it” guilty” we are on the outside looking in as always. If it was showing more positive in the Deeper south I’m sure it wouldn’t have came up. I think most of it is just giving people a hard time but in a friendly way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NoSnowATL said:
I think it’s fine, if you look at who is questioning it” guilty” we are on the outside looking in as always. If it was showing more positive in the Deeper south I’m sure it wouldn’t have came up. I think most of it is just giving people a hard time but in a friendly way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yeah, everybody’s been nice about it. It’s just funny that it’s one of the most hotly debated items that is a recurring phenomenon every winter. You’ll get this stampede of people wanting to start a thread. And then others will push back on it. I honestly don’t care as logs as people are nice about it, like you said. It’s just something that seems to happen a lot.
 
Jon said:
The 0z was more suppressed but this is still right where we want it.

The timing is remarkable because the onset is evening through the night. Really maxes out the 2mT minimums. Any change in speed and it falls outside of the ideal time frame.

b5e2788cd81e6a721a367408d8a8eb47.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Why can’t the Midlands every see a model showing snow like Charlotte always do???
 
Meteorologist1999 said:
Why can’t the Midlands every see a model showing snow like Charlotte always do???
Click to expand...
Because we are cursed, everything from Sports to weather. Gamecocks never win anything and we never get a winter storm here. BUT, 2010 was similar, we kept getting near misses that year then bam, we hit the jackpot storm in Feb 2010.
 
GaWx said:
This was a great decision to go ahead and start a separate thread because this threat was beginning to dominate the Jan thread thanks to rapidly increasing model support for at least a threat. Once that happens to a monthly thread and we’re within a week, I think it is the best decision. What’s the big harm if it doesn’t materialize? One extra archived thread? At least the Jammin’ Jan thread will be less jammed than would otherwise be the case for those looking back at the Jan thread in the future.
Click to expand...

Four pages in only five hours regarding the storm. All of which would've "jammed" the Jammin January thread. Okay... debate done. :)
 
This just came to me. I know this is real and will be fooled by this lmao:



"Dear Valued Customer,


Thank you for keep using Apple ID!

We inform you that your personal data has been update and need verification.

Please find attached the documentation to completed update account information.


Thank's,

Apple Service"
------------------------------------------------

If somehow the general message isn't enough to sound fake, wouldn't the numerous obvious grammatical errors give it away? How could one be fooled by this poop? I guess if someone were drunk out of their mind...maybe? It is sooo bad that it is kind of funny.
 
GaWx said:
This just came to me. I know this is real and will be fooled by this lmao:



"Dear Valued Customer,


Thank you for keep using Apple ID!

We inform you that your personal data has been update and need verification.

Please find attached the documentation to completed update account information.


Thank's,

Apple Service"
------------------------------------------------

If somehow the general message isn't enough to sound fake, wouldn't the numerous obvious grammatical errors give it away? How could one be fooled by this poop? I guess if someone were drunk out of their mind...maybe? It is sooo bad that it is kind of funny.
Click to expand...
Lol it's funny to see the foreign hackers with bad grammar try and send this garbage. Good thing they don't know proper English or people might actually fall for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top