We're changing our WunderBlogs. Learn more about this important update on our FAQ page.

Atypical Banning and Censoring is Typical at Wunderground

By: RTSplayer , 4:39 PM GMT on April 12, 2013

I wish there was a more appropriate way to address these issues, but there is not any obviously more appropriate route at this time.

I have decided that it is in the interest of the integrity and defense of myself, as well as the integrity and defense of weather and climate discussion, to point out some specific reasons moderation on this site is anything other than "Moderate".

I am posting this here because the feedback option is apparently inadequate, as some of the same complaints have previously been made by other members in that section, with little evidence of any actions being taken to solve the problem.

1, An actual record

I plan on starting a blog entry where I will just copy and past the quotations of all of the regulars who regularly make under handed personal attacks against centrist users, or otherwise bait centrist users, because the degree of deceit and bias on this issue is completely out of control. Although it's annoying, and is a shame that the underhandedness of other users causes this, I may even make an additional blog entry which I will use for nothing else except recording my own posts, so that unfair moderation cannot delete them without cause.

2, Atypical Ban And Delete

This site does more "Ban and Delete" than is warranted. It is not appropriate for a moderator to ban a poster over every minor infraction deemed by "somebody" as a "personal attack". Since the moderators delete the entire post, there is no evidence for the banned member to defend themselves against a false or exaggerated claim.

Moreover, the practice of deleting an entire post because of something silly, like one word, which is often the case, is producing confirmation bias, because it is obviously being used in many cases as an excuse by the moderators to censor anyone who holds a centrist view on any topic.

Additionally, I have even caught posters, in a few case, using the "modify comment" feature to bait other posters, and then deleting portions of their post in response, hiding the evidence of an exchange of personal attacks they in fact started, which leads to the second person getting banned.

In many cases, the post must not have been too offensive. I've even been banned for posts that got multiple positive feed backs.

If people are going to get banned because of every minor thing which may offend some extreme minority, there isn't going to be any balanced discussion on a blog, because extreme minorities can't be pleased anyway.

3, Defamation by users, moderators, and even administrators against other users, or other professional climatologists and meteorologists not associated with this site, or in one case previously not associated with this site (apparently unknown to himself,) who hold different views.

A person has a legal right to defend themselves against defamation, either through legal action, or through public counter arguments.

Brian Norcross has been defamed by regular members, moderators, and even staff members of this site in the past. I'm not talking about trolls. I'm talking about the moderators and regular members, and even paid members. Most of this occurred before the merger with The Weather Channel happened, so he may not be aware of it, but it remains true. I suspect Mr. Norcross has been made aware of this, since he is a paneled blogger. He has not made a post in the past 3 months, which was a very abrupt change since he was posting rather often prior to that time. I don't know or claim to know whether the two issues are related, or whether he just isn't on here recently due to it being the off season for hurricanes.

The other professional who is most often defamed on this site is Joe Bastardi. It's one thing to disagree with his opinion, but the behavior of people on this site with regards to him is reprehensible, and it has been on-going publicly and repeatedly for several years.

At any rate, this defamatory behavior has also been regularly observed in regards to this site's members, moderators, and staff defaming other weather and climate professionals who are not associated with this site, primarily when their view differs from the majority view on this site.

Not only are the offenders not banned, they are in some cases encouraged by the moderators, in some cases they are the moderators or other site officials.

This defamation issue is one of the reasons certain skilled amateurs and entry level professionals permanently left this site over the past few years, because they were the victims of this behavior, or someone else was the victim.

4, Paneled Bloggers and Moderators are Unaccountable and Above Review

The site is owned by the administrator, so ultimately he decides what stays and goes; great. However, this site is assuming the role, whether admittedly or un-admittedly, of a public information and warning service regarding weather and climate issues. After all, you believe you are offering more accurate and relevant information, or more skilled opinion or interpretation of information than the NWS, local stations, NOAA, or other government or independent research or media firms, and you are offering these opinions as a degreed and experienced professional in the field.

It is therefore inappropriate for paneled members to make certain current events related, political, or moral statements which are provably not true or accurate, or are not obviously true. This is particularly true when using those same wrong, misleading, or unprovable statements as an analogy or premise for a professional opinion.

One example I have in mind, but not the only one, is the fact that it doesn't make sense for the paneled blogger to mention homosexuality or LGBT at all. Further, it certainly doesn't make sense for him to make a provably false or otherwise incorrect statement about the American majority opinion on that subject. He shouldn't even be talking about that, never mind making a false statement about that subject, and then using false statement as an analogy or premise in a professional argument or opinion. For lack of a better term, it looked like garbage then, and it still looks like garbage now.

The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

Log In or Join

You be able to leave comments on this blog.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 1 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

1. WunderAlertBot (Admin)
4:00 PM GMT on April 13, 2013
RTSplayer has created a new entry.

Viewing: 1 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

Top of Page
Ad Blocker Enabled

RTSplayer doesn't have a bio yet.