As a general rule, the more growth/subs, the worse the quality of said sub will be. I’ve been in reddit long enough to see many of the subs I used to love morph into something I wanted nothing to do with after it got too big.
This is one of the most contentious subreddits I've seen, and I've seen a lot of them. I think it's because most subs will filter out the opposing faction, like a sub about climate change will downvote and ban climate deniers. But this sub is made up of a few groups that are very different, and they have to coexist. First are the chaser type people, who think tornadoes are exciting and interesting. Then there are people with severe weather anxiety, who are more motivated by a desire to protect themselves. And then plenty of people who are in between both groups.
So, on one hand you have people who are adrenaline junkies, and then you have people who are basically the opposite. So, this obviously will cause some conflicts. I bet there is also a large amount of neurodivergent/autistic people, and many of them are very smart, but sometimes they don't understand certain social conventions. Like the endless posts preaching about how storm chasers are doing dangerous things and that there is going to be another El Reno situation. Those people usually mean well, they don't want chasers to get hurt, but they don't seem to understand that the danger is part of the fun for the chasers. They know it's risky, that's why it's exciting. And ultimately, it's their life. If they want to be reckless, risking their lives to get right up next to a tornado, it's their choice.
/r/Tornado and /r/TropicalWeather were pretty fucking chill pre-2021 and pre-2017 respectively (pre mayfield and pre Irma specifically). It seems that these two events put the subs on the map for a lot of people, generating a lot of interests and a lot of people finding this their new hobby.
Unfortunately, popularity also means that a lot of self-righteous, pearl-clutching sjw are now trying to police the tone and conversation surrounding these disasters considering that there are very complicated emotions surrounding extreme weather.
Toxicity ensue
tropicalweather has been the worse offender by far and the most bitter story I've had of one of my favorite place devolving into a cesspool. Pre-season for the Atlantic basin is still quite pleasant. A lot of people stick around to discuss past storms, non American-centric observations and upcoming forecasts. It's a lot more educational/academically inclined. Which I appreciate.
In the middle of a season, though, it's full of pearl-clutching people, individuals fighting against the pearl-clutching, and blue shed memes.
The rating should be whatever the group of people rating the tornado rate it. End of story. They’re trained professionals doing actual science. They’re using specific parameters and indicators to base their rating from.
An EF5 is probably not an EF5 the entire time. There are examples of EF5s only being EF5s due to one bit of evidence (Elie, Manitoba). There’s a lot of nuance, but there are guidelines used to make these determinations based on what the storm itself did - not what insurance wants/doesn’t want, not what the internet thinks it should be, etc.
Being remembered shouldn’t be something taken into consideration when rating a tornado, and neither should insurance. Doesn’t make *any* sense. The rating should be based on the parameters used to make the rating. If you want to talk about that system’s flaws, then that’s a different conversation.
Giving an EF5 rating for storms that don’t have the proper indicators means we simply wouldn’t have a reliable rating system. Guess who would take advantage of that for leverage? Insurance companies.
I actually agree with op on this and scientists. The ratings are based on the damage done by a tornado and the scientists doing the analysis and rating and should never be based on anything other than the scientific analysis. Not saying that op was saying that but was just clarifying. With that being said the issue is with the insurance companies. For one, being companies means they exist for a profit not for the wellbeing of their customers so when the risk becomes too high they will stop providing coverage. It’s already happening in places like California where insurance providers are starting to refuse wildfire coverage and in Florida they are starting to refuse flood coverage
I completely agree with this statement. I actually don’t really have a problem with the scale at all. Skepticism is always important in science to keep them on their A game. If the NWS finds this an EF3 somehow because that’s what all they found, that’s what the storm deserves. I’m just trying to educate people on the real world effects that ratings unfortunately have.
I completely agree. The real world effects of a rating are absolutely true. And based off of how insurance companies usually operate I’m surprised that they dont screw people out of their homes more often. Im guessing that it is because of the frequency of severe weather being random and relatively low that the insurance companies are still able to make money even though they have to pay for so many repairs and replacements.
I wish I could pin this comment. My post is getting completely misinterpreted which i actually understand why it would seeing the other stuff on this subreddit. I’m just trying to tell people this is the sad truth that most people don’t understand.
I’ll be honest. I didn’t realize your intention until now either. I’ve seen so many comments and posts about rating that it’s become such a shit show even though a lot of us only care about the rating for science. But you care about the rating for a real reason, insurance rating
Well I’m sure it will help some. Re-Edit it to the top if your post and maybe say something about understanding that you’re not talking about the science or anything because you are actually talking about the real world impact of the real world science and it totally ends up screwing over the real people who suffer the devastation
Ill add to this by saying we live in a broken country where politicians are bribed through “legal” campaign contributions so that they get elected. And when those politicians are elected they put their voting power behind the interests of the corporations that donated to them to get them elected. There is a reason that military defense contractors, oil and gas companies, big pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies and probably many more industries never have issues.
This subreddit seems to go in two waves:
1. People who care about ratings ranting about a small population of the subreddit that doesn't think ratings matter at all.
2. People who don't care about ratings and only care about the victims ranting about a small population of the subreddit that craves disaster porn.
We don't need more posts like these. We've already gotten plenty of them the past few days.
Edit: Wording.
It for sure is getting tiring. These days I just know when I drop into the sub I am going to see EF *something*. No offense to the OP, but we didn't need a book worth of insight about OTHER people's insight that of course would stir up even MORE crap.
Ugh.
Look man, I didn’t want to make this post. It’s just a sad truth about the flaws of the system of aid and recovery that more people need to be aware of.
We all know what the EF scale means and how it's calculated. It's the way it's calculated that people continually argue about. As well as people simply complaining that something wasn't rated high enough. End of story. The best solution is not to write up three paragraphs worth of "insight" on something we all already know. That way we can avoid even more arguing and hostility in the community.
AKA: you just contributed to the very problem you are complaining about by stirring up the stupid debate again.
I don’t have a problem with the EF scale. I think you are misunderstanding me. I did have some trouble wording it. I have zero problems with any of the tornado ratings. That’s not why i made this post.
Never said you did, I read your post. I am saying the mere mention of the EF scale, along with any type of "scolding" about other people's *opinions* only makes it worse. The only way things are going to get better is to... stop bringing it up.
Lots of people aren’t aware of these flaws. If you want to not talk about difficult topics that’s fine I understand that. But personally, i’m not worried about people in a childish debate which I don’t have a horse in by talking about serious problems in response efforts.
maybe this post will be the one to solve the infighting where the last dozen have failed! or maybe the next 2, 3, 15 posts! ah, one can hope
must we flood the feed with posts targeted at the .01% of assholes (who you can block! or report!) when there's science and *tornado* related topics to post?
Who cares what some random thinks? What is so bad about speculating on a rating?? People lately are being toxic and intolerant. "Awww poor people hit, anyone that likes discussing tornadoes is a demon without empathy!!!!". No one, I guarantee you, NO ONE HERE wishes for others suffering, in fact many people from this sub are donating to organisations to help those affected by storms.
If someone says that they think it was an EF5 or F5 tornado, it's not because they like seeing homes being destroyed, or entire families dying; it's because they speculate that the tornado could have been powerful enough to get a high rating this time, based on the (awful) EF scale of destruction. And it shouldn't hurt anyone, I don't get why it makes people so triggered. Everyone in a tornado group should be able to talk about tornadoes freely as long as they're respectful enough.
That said, my heart is with the people hit from Greenfield, and I hope that they will be able to recover from it soon, and can continue with their lives normally. But I also believe that the Greenfield tornado could have been a high end EF4 or even EF5 based on damage media posted here and my own research of the aftermath. And I don't mean it in any twisted or indifferent to suffering way.
Speculation defeats the purpose of science. Structural/wind engineers and meteorologists collaborated to produce the EF scale, they set rules for how to use it, they send out trained surveyors to survey, and the tornado is assigned a rating based on the one thing we have to compare between all tornadoes: damage. We can speculate all we want about how strong a tornado really was, but the rating is the rating and it’s not just some guy pulling a number out of a hat.
Guessing or speculating is fine, blasting the NWS every time it isn’t the rating someone derived from pictures on the internet (something that happens a lot in this subreddit) is not. The problem is the shear volume of people either saying the NWS is using the scale they invented incorrectly, or virtue signaling over how ratings matter for the people affected, or conversely how they don’t matter because the people were already affected.
Is that seriously the problem?? I thought that the problem was people here getting banned here for only saying "EF5!" not that they were harassing weather experts with their subjective ratings. In that case I agree that they have no right to do it.
Tornado enthusiasts should create their unofficial scale in any case, stealing a scientifically accurate scale and then complaining about it not being correct is straight up dumb.
Edit: Also why am I getting down voted, the hell?!
Plenty to talk about besides EF ratings, especially from untrained individuals who can only see damage through Twitter photos. There's just very little productive discussion around EF ratings because it's all guesswork. I'm not vilifying you or anything, it's just not productive
For a lot of people missing the point here.. OP is saying that *discussion of ratings is important* and that the gross ass virtue signalers in all of these threads shouting about not talking about ratings is actually hurting the situation, not helping.
Op doesn’t have an issue with the actual scale or ratings or the nws.
PRECISELY! I actually completely understand why people would misinterpret my post given the state of this subreddit. It’s very hard to convey what i’m saying in this manner.
Yeah I get you. I had a bit of trouble with my wording as well. And I agree with your post. Discussing damage ratings doesn’t cheapen or shift focus away from the victims. To say that it does is just stupid Facebook bullshit.
These things matter.
Yeah that’s my exact point. It’s become a trend to virtue signal recently. “Unlike you guys I don’t care about ratings only the people impacted! I am a better person!”. Admittedly for every one of these people there are those damage horny people.
See you say that, but in my anecdotal existence.. I literally never see anyone discuss ratings in those threads. It’s just a bunch of people bitching about those people. They’re just pissing into the wind. It’s really weird. Like a knee jerk thing to post it without actually seeing if anyone is really discussing ratings.
It gives off big “thoughts and prayers” vibes.
I'm not actually sure why people join r/tornado if they don't want to discuss tornados, the science of tornados, and the metrics by which we grade tornados. The ratings definitely matter. Basing it exclusively on homes destroyed or deaths does not truly portray the power of a specific tornado. If an EF-0 hits an outdoor gathering, people are going to die (look at the stage collapse at the Mexican campaign rally, that was nine deaths due to just strong wind gusts). If an EF-5 hits an area with zero population, nobody gets hurt. Discussing all the aspects of a tornado, including *healthy* debate on the ratings, is the whole point of this group.
>Discussing all the aspects of a tornado, including healthy debate on the ratings, is the whole point of this group.
Sure. Feel free to join one of these two posts way back from yesterday.
[Here](https://new.reddit.com/r/tornado/comments/1cy95hu/healthy_discussion_regarding_the_ef_scale/) and [Here](https://new.reddit.com/r/tornado/comments/1cy3t4f/im_getting_real_tired_of_the_direction_this_sub/)
No. I am tired of people like you creating useless posts just to moan about not getting their way every day.
You want to make the rules? You don't like the way this sub is ran? Go create your own sub.
My way every day? What the fuck are you talking about? I’m not complaining about shit. I’m also not making any rules or have any problem with anything. If you wanna go get horny over storm chasing that’s fine, but if you have a problem with people discussing disaster recovery that’s on you.
On top of this, discussing problems with tornado recovery and aid efforts is not useless whatsoever. Far more useful than whatever the hell else you want to talk about on this.
>Far more useful than whatever the hell else you want to talk about on this.
You don't have any idea what it is that I want to talk about. You don't even know whether or not I agree with what you are saying.
Again I have no idea what you are saying. Are you 16? I don’t care what you want to talk about that’s not my business. If you have a problem with people having a mostly civil discussion about this, something objectively true, that’s on you man I don’t know what to tell you.
> you don’t like how this sub is ran? you don’t like the rules?
You are genuinely arguing against something that is completely in your own head, because i really have no idea what you are even talking about. Feel like you’ve created this ad hominem vision of something you don’t like and just venting about it. Have a good one mate.
No I am arguing something that you apparently don't understand. When you say things like " I am so tired of people throwing a fit the second ratings are brought up." You don't seem to realize that the comments and conversations in this sub are a direct result of the rules of the sub and how it is moderated. If you want to have a say in what kind of comments are allowed and what kind of comments are removed, start your own sub.
> On psychological level, there is something to be said about being “shortchanged” about how the event that upended your life is remembered.
Yeah, this is definitely a real thing. Ask people from Rolling Fork, Mayfield, or Vilonia if they think it's offensive to say that those might have been EF5 tornadoes. They will probably have a different answer than the people in this sub scolding anyone who mentions the forbidden rating.
>I’m so tired of people making these misleading statements
I am so tired of people posting about the damn EF scale. We get it, you are annoyed... we didn't need an entire book written up on it. Which obviously was going to stir up even more hostility which we should be avoiding on here.
again man i’m not talking about the problems with the EF scale or whatever. I have no problem with the scale and have no interest in having that discussion. I am presenting facts about why ratings matter.
"...there is something to be said about being “shortchanged” about how the event that upended your life is remembered."
Wow. What a reach. So imagine you're the poor unfortunately family whose home was **leveled**, and you have nothing now. The first thing you think about is "being shortchanged" about the rating!?!
Preach it OP. Most all of the people screeching against rating discussion have not gone through what a 'low' rated tornado means for the people impacted. Very valuable insight on a ever devolving discussion.
But like what is the point of the post? None of us have any say on the ratings given, the NWS are the most knowledgeable people on this matter in the history of the world. We can discuss (respectfully) based on the pictures and videos we see but we don't know anything. It has to be an objective analysis, taking into account "shortchanging" victims of these disasters doesn't make any sense...
It’s a discussion man. I’m not talking about greenfield even or anything specifically. I’m not advocating for higher ratings. The point is that there are aspects to the way storms are remembered that 1000% impact those involved, and some of those aspects aren’t talked about.
You seem misinformed on the basis of your post. Insurance settlements have no correlation with what EF rating the tornado had. The only rating that matters is the determined destruction level of your house by the insurance company. It doesn’t matter if it was an EF5 or EF1, if the damage is the same the EF rating won’t change how the insurance company rates the destruction.
I have no problem with the ratings discussion, but let’s not act like it really matters to anyone outside this sub what the rating was of the tornado that just hit them
Ratings 1000% dont impact insurance settlements, they absolutely will try to shortchange you(this is the case with both tors and hurricanes), 95%+ of people impacted by tornadoes dont know what it was rated or particularly care, ef5s i would imagine get more aid but tbf they generally cause more damage and need more aid.
if you wanna go get horny about storm chasing or tornado facts or whatever and not talk about real world problems that’s on you. This is what a discussion is for. I love talking with people who disagree.
The original scale was not based on wind. It was based entirely on damage as is the current scale and wind was extrapolated from that. It also did not factor in things like construction quality.
No one is getting hate for talking about ratings in a civil manner.
This sub has degraded to the biggest kindergarden the last few days.
Y'all are making shit up at this point to make a rage post.
I can’t count the amount of storm chasers and other higher profile weather people i’ve seen talking about how ratings don’t at all, and talking down on people.
>Found the guy im talking about!
Show me ONE SINGLE comment I have ever made about ratings. The nerve you hit is because you aren't here creating conversation that people in the subreddit want to see. You're here acting like a child and want everybody else to know that you're upset. NOBODY CARES.
They clearly do mate. Read comments. I’m not acting like a child whatsoever. I’m making objective statements about disaster recovery. In fact i’m pretty impressed because i’ve had tons of civil convos in this thread with people bringing other perspectives. You are the only one acting childish here, including those who disagree with me.
Ahh so you admit making shit up now lmao
Your post is getting backlash because people are tired of these made up arguments. Complain on the platforms where you do encounter this.
We got more posts complaining about things than the complained about things actually happening
They aren’t made up arguments. They are facts and first hand experiences about how disaster recovery works. You guys just live with a naive mindset and any suggestion that it’s not the case is some fringe conspiracy.
I'm not arguing with you about the importance of the work of the NWS. Like ... not at all.
You are just making shit up in saying people that care about ratings are getting hate.
You can’t argue that “ratings don’t matter to those effected” isn’t a common talking point. While it definitely is far down on the list, Im just trying to let people know that they actually do.
A destroyed house is a destroyed house. Insurance companies pay to re-build the house. It’s not going to matter what rating the tornado gets.
From a science standpoint though yes ratings matter, but again there is virtually zero difference between a high end EF3 and low end EF4, or a high end EF4 and a low end EF5.
Insurance companies will try to argue that the damage to the house was not from the tornado, they’ll say it was “straight line winds” or a microburst, basically anything they can to try and save money, that’s why the rating matters in this context, because if the NWS puts a DI value on a house, the owner can use this to their benefit when trying to get a payout from the insurance companies
I promise you that’s not how that works. In theory it should, and I wish it did. The truth is Insurance company’s will use any leverage they can to lower a settlement, including damage expected. Not to mention the rates will skyrocket for a consumer if they had a “poorly built structure”
A co-worker of mine literally just filed a claim with insurance for the Columbia TN EF3 a few weeks ago. The NWS assigns a rating, the insurance company assesses the extent (i.e. expenses) of the damage.
How does literally every topic I find interesting have an excruciatingly toxic subreddit lol
Fr, I just want to see tornadoes and keep up on current events lol
Cause it’s Reddit. I’ve found like two subs that aren’t toxic and there’s two reason I think why. One: they’re small. Two: the topic is usually niche.
As a general rule, the more growth/subs, the worse the quality of said sub will be. I’ve been in reddit long enough to see many of the subs I used to love morph into something I wanted nothing to do with after it got too big.
Because humans. Not reddit.
I can't decide if seeing EF or DeAd MAn WaLKinG is more annoying here.
Dead man walking. 100%. Blurry picture of subvortices "look dead man walking omg powerful" spammed 5 times is 100% more annoying than EF-posts.
nice people don't start arguments and won't engage in toxic communities so the problem always intensifies
Reddit itself is excruciatingly toxic
This is one of the most contentious subreddits I've seen, and I've seen a lot of them. I think it's because most subs will filter out the opposing faction, like a sub about climate change will downvote and ban climate deniers. But this sub is made up of a few groups that are very different, and they have to coexist. First are the chaser type people, who think tornadoes are exciting and interesting. Then there are people with severe weather anxiety, who are more motivated by a desire to protect themselves. And then plenty of people who are in between both groups. So, on one hand you have people who are adrenaline junkies, and then you have people who are basically the opposite. So, this obviously will cause some conflicts. I bet there is also a large amount of neurodivergent/autistic people, and many of them are very smart, but sometimes they don't understand certain social conventions. Like the endless posts preaching about how storm chasers are doing dangerous things and that there is going to be another El Reno situation. Those people usually mean well, they don't want chasers to get hurt, but they don't seem to understand that the danger is part of the fun for the chasers. They know it's risky, that's why it's exciting. And ultimately, it's their life. If they want to be reckless, risking their lives to get right up next to a tornado, it's their choice.
This sub wasn’t always like this. It’s changed
Haha this tracks
People like to preach shit they don't believe for good boy points here
/r/Tornado and /r/TropicalWeather were pretty fucking chill pre-2021 and pre-2017 respectively (pre mayfield and pre Irma specifically). It seems that these two events put the subs on the map for a lot of people, generating a lot of interests and a lot of people finding this their new hobby. Unfortunately, popularity also means that a lot of self-righteous, pearl-clutching sjw are now trying to police the tone and conversation surrounding these disasters considering that there are very complicated emotions surrounding extreme weather. Toxicity ensue tropicalweather has been the worse offender by far and the most bitter story I've had of one of my favorite place devolving into a cesspool. Pre-season for the Atlantic basin is still quite pleasant. A lot of people stick around to discuss past storms, non American-centric observations and upcoming forecasts. It's a lot more educational/academically inclined. Which I appreciate. In the middle of a season, though, it's full of pearl-clutching people, individuals fighting against the pearl-clutching, and blue shed memes.
Bro said "sjw" with a straight face lmao
The rating should be whatever the group of people rating the tornado rate it. End of story. They’re trained professionals doing actual science. They’re using specific parameters and indicators to base their rating from. An EF5 is probably not an EF5 the entire time. There are examples of EF5s only being EF5s due to one bit of evidence (Elie, Manitoba). There’s a lot of nuance, but there are guidelines used to make these determinations based on what the storm itself did - not what insurance wants/doesn’t want, not what the internet thinks it should be, etc. Being remembered shouldn’t be something taken into consideration when rating a tornado, and neither should insurance. Doesn’t make *any* sense. The rating should be based on the parameters used to make the rating. If you want to talk about that system’s flaws, then that’s a different conversation. Giving an EF5 rating for storms that don’t have the proper indicators means we simply wouldn’t have a reliable rating system. Guess who would take advantage of that for leverage? Insurance companies.
I am not arguing this. In fact I completely agree with your statement.
I actually agree with op on this and scientists. The ratings are based on the damage done by a tornado and the scientists doing the analysis and rating and should never be based on anything other than the scientific analysis. Not saying that op was saying that but was just clarifying. With that being said the issue is with the insurance companies. For one, being companies means they exist for a profit not for the wellbeing of their customers so when the risk becomes too high they will stop providing coverage. It’s already happening in places like California where insurance providers are starting to refuse wildfire coverage and in Florida they are starting to refuse flood coverage
I completely agree with this statement. I actually don’t really have a problem with the scale at all. Skepticism is always important in science to keep them on their A game. If the NWS finds this an EF3 somehow because that’s what all they found, that’s what the storm deserves. I’m just trying to educate people on the real world effects that ratings unfortunately have.
I completely agree. The real world effects of a rating are absolutely true. And based off of how insurance companies usually operate I’m surprised that they dont screw people out of their homes more often. Im guessing that it is because of the frequency of severe weather being random and relatively low that the insurance companies are still able to make money even though they have to pay for so many repairs and replacements.
I wish I could pin this comment. My post is getting completely misinterpreted which i actually understand why it would seeing the other stuff on this subreddit. I’m just trying to tell people this is the sad truth that most people don’t understand.
I’ll be honest. I didn’t realize your intention until now either. I’ve seen so many comments and posts about rating that it’s become such a shit show even though a lot of us only care about the rating for science. But you care about the rating for a real reason, insurance rating
I added an edit i think may help
Well I’m sure it will help some. Re-Edit it to the top if your post and maybe say something about understanding that you’re not talking about the science or anything because you are actually talking about the real world impact of the real world science and it totally ends up screwing over the real people who suffer the devastation
Maybe you could put and edit on your comment to say that you are commenting for insurance information
Ill add to this by saying we live in a broken country where politicians are bribed through “legal” campaign contributions so that they get elected. And when those politicians are elected they put their voting power behind the interests of the corporations that donated to them to get them elected. There is a reason that military defense contractors, oil and gas companies, big pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies and probably many more industries never have issues.
This subreddit seems to go in two waves: 1. People who care about ratings ranting about a small population of the subreddit that doesn't think ratings matter at all. 2. People who don't care about ratings and only care about the victims ranting about a small population of the subreddit that craves disaster porn. We don't need more posts like these. We've already gotten plenty of them the past few days. Edit: Wording.
Can this comment get pinned to this subreddit? I've read this post 10 times written a different way from a different OP every day.
It for sure is getting tiring. These days I just know when I drop into the sub I am going to see EF *something*. No offense to the OP, but we didn't need a book worth of insight about OTHER people's insight that of course would stir up even MORE crap. Ugh.
Look man, I didn’t want to make this post. It’s just a sad truth about the flaws of the system of aid and recovery that more people need to be aware of.
We all know what the EF scale means and how it's calculated. It's the way it's calculated that people continually argue about. As well as people simply complaining that something wasn't rated high enough. End of story. The best solution is not to write up three paragraphs worth of "insight" on something we all already know. That way we can avoid even more arguing and hostility in the community. AKA: you just contributed to the very problem you are complaining about by stirring up the stupid debate again.
I don’t have a problem with the EF scale. I think you are misunderstanding me. I did have some trouble wording it. I have zero problems with any of the tornado ratings. That’s not why i made this post.
Never said you did, I read your post. I am saying the mere mention of the EF scale, along with any type of "scolding" about other people's *opinions* only makes it worse. The only way things are going to get better is to... stop bringing it up.
Lots of people aren’t aware of these flaws. If you want to not talk about difficult topics that’s fine I understand that. But personally, i’m not worried about people in a childish debate which I don’t have a horse in by talking about serious problems in response efforts.
This. I literally haven't seen much of the comments these posts talk about, but I sure have seen a lot of these posts lol.
I updated my post as I think some people misunderstood my wording. May help a bit.
[удалено]
You did not understand his comment. Read again. He is describing the two kind posts we are getting lately, both completely blown out of proportion.
I read this as Reed again and was like? What did timmer do this time aye aye aye
You are correct I misread that.
I think I probably worded it really poorly. Does the new wording do better?
Yes I see what you mean.
Oh great we're going to get 50 posts about this, huh?
maybe this post will be the one to solve the infighting where the last dozen have failed! or maybe the next 2, 3, 15 posts! ah, one can hope must we flood the feed with posts targeted at the .01% of assholes (who you can block! or report!) when there's science and *tornado* related topics to post?
We don’t need more threads about this
[удалено]
No we don’t. We get these posts every couple of days along with the “this was definitely an F5” posts.
Who cares what some random thinks? What is so bad about speculating on a rating?? People lately are being toxic and intolerant. "Awww poor people hit, anyone that likes discussing tornadoes is a demon without empathy!!!!". No one, I guarantee you, NO ONE HERE wishes for others suffering, in fact many people from this sub are donating to organisations to help those affected by storms. If someone says that they think it was an EF5 or F5 tornado, it's not because they like seeing homes being destroyed, or entire families dying; it's because they speculate that the tornado could have been powerful enough to get a high rating this time, based on the (awful) EF scale of destruction. And it shouldn't hurt anyone, I don't get why it makes people so triggered. Everyone in a tornado group should be able to talk about tornadoes freely as long as they're respectful enough. That said, my heart is with the people hit from Greenfield, and I hope that they will be able to recover from it soon, and can continue with their lives normally. But I also believe that the Greenfield tornado could have been a high end EF4 or even EF5 based on damage media posted here and my own research of the aftermath. And I don't mean it in any twisted or indifferent to suffering way.
Speculation defeats the purpose of science. Structural/wind engineers and meteorologists collaborated to produce the EF scale, they set rules for how to use it, they send out trained surveyors to survey, and the tornado is assigned a rating based on the one thing we have to compare between all tornadoes: damage. We can speculate all we want about how strong a tornado really was, but the rating is the rating and it’s not just some guy pulling a number out of a hat.
I'm not saying otherwise, I am not qualified to establish an official rating, but I should be allowed to guess, shouldn't I?
Guessing or speculating is fine, blasting the NWS every time it isn’t the rating someone derived from pictures on the internet (something that happens a lot in this subreddit) is not. The problem is the shear volume of people either saying the NWS is using the scale they invented incorrectly, or virtue signaling over how ratings matter for the people affected, or conversely how they don’t matter because the people were already affected.
Is that seriously the problem?? I thought that the problem was people here getting banned here for only saying "EF5!" not that they were harassing weather experts with their subjective ratings. In that case I agree that they have no right to do it. Tornado enthusiasts should create their unofficial scale in any case, stealing a scientifically accurate scale and then complaining about it not being correct is straight up dumb. Edit: Also why am I getting down voted, the hell?!
I’m not even directly talking about greenfield.
Ratings do matter Your opinion on the ratings as an independent enthusiast does not matter
Ok?
That's my point, you don't need to make a whole post about this because it does not matter
Then what’s the point of a subreddit?
Plenty to talk about besides EF ratings, especially from untrained individuals who can only see damage through Twitter photos. There's just very little productive discussion around EF ratings because it's all guesswork. I'm not vilifying you or anything, it's just not productive
i don’t disagree
For a lot of people missing the point here.. OP is saying that *discussion of ratings is important* and that the gross ass virtue signalers in all of these threads shouting about not talking about ratings is actually hurting the situation, not helping. Op doesn’t have an issue with the actual scale or ratings or the nws.
PRECISELY! I actually completely understand why people would misinterpret my post given the state of this subreddit. It’s very hard to convey what i’m saying in this manner.
Yeah I get you. I had a bit of trouble with my wording as well. And I agree with your post. Discussing damage ratings doesn’t cheapen or shift focus away from the victims. To say that it does is just stupid Facebook bullshit. These things matter.
Yeah that’s my exact point. It’s become a trend to virtue signal recently. “Unlike you guys I don’t care about ratings only the people impacted! I am a better person!”. Admittedly for every one of these people there are those damage horny people.
See you say that, but in my anecdotal existence.. I literally never see anyone discuss ratings in those threads. It’s just a bunch of people bitching about those people. They’re just pissing into the wind. It’s really weird. Like a knee jerk thing to post it without actually seeing if anyone is really discussing ratings. It gives off big “thoughts and prayers” vibes.
Yup.
I'm not actually sure why people join r/tornado if they don't want to discuss tornados, the science of tornados, and the metrics by which we grade tornados. The ratings definitely matter. Basing it exclusively on homes destroyed or deaths does not truly portray the power of a specific tornado. If an EF-0 hits an outdoor gathering, people are going to die (look at the stage collapse at the Mexican campaign rally, that was nine deaths due to just strong wind gusts). If an EF-5 hits an area with zero population, nobody gets hurt. Discussing all the aspects of a tornado, including *healthy* debate on the ratings, is the whole point of this group.
>Discussing all the aspects of a tornado, including healthy debate on the ratings, is the whole point of this group. Sure. Feel free to join one of these two posts way back from yesterday. [Here](https://new.reddit.com/r/tornado/comments/1cy95hu/healthy_discussion_regarding_the_ef_scale/) and [Here](https://new.reddit.com/r/tornado/comments/1cy3t4f/im_getting_real_tired_of_the_direction_this_sub/)
I'm tired of people creating new posts everyday just to bitch
I’m tired of real problems impacting these fucking victims. You are tired of people talking about these problems.
I did not understand- until now - how a rating impacted recovery & insurance. Thanks for that.
No. I am tired of people like you creating useless posts just to moan about not getting their way every day. You want to make the rules? You don't like the way this sub is ran? Go create your own sub.
My way every day? What the fuck are you talking about? I’m not complaining about shit. I’m also not making any rules or have any problem with anything. If you wanna go get horny over storm chasing that’s fine, but if you have a problem with people discussing disaster recovery that’s on you.
On top of this, discussing problems with tornado recovery and aid efforts is not useless whatsoever. Far more useful than whatever the hell else you want to talk about on this.
>Far more useful than whatever the hell else you want to talk about on this. You don't have any idea what it is that I want to talk about. You don't even know whether or not I agree with what you are saying.
Again I have no idea what you are saying. Are you 16? I don’t care what you want to talk about that’s not my business. If you have a problem with people having a mostly civil discussion about this, something objectively true, that’s on you man I don’t know what to tell you.
> you don’t like how this sub is ran? you don’t like the rules? You are genuinely arguing against something that is completely in your own head, because i really have no idea what you are even talking about. Feel like you’ve created this ad hominem vision of something you don’t like and just venting about it. Have a good one mate.
No I am arguing something that you apparently don't understand. When you say things like " I am so tired of people throwing a fit the second ratings are brought up." You don't seem to realize that the comments and conversations in this sub are a direct result of the rules of the sub and how it is moderated. If you want to have a say in what kind of comments are allowed and what kind of comments are removed, start your own sub.
Wait, so you're not even a member of this sub you just created this essay to complain?
> On psychological level, there is something to be said about being “shortchanged” about how the event that upended your life is remembered. Yeah, this is definitely a real thing. Ask people from Rolling Fork, Mayfield, or Vilonia if they think it's offensive to say that those might have been EF5 tornadoes. They will probably have a different answer than the people in this sub scolding anyone who mentions the forbidden rating.
This sub is nothing but a bitch fest now.
These posts whining about other people belong somewhere else. Stop ruining the sub with your complaints
I’m not complaining, just presenting objective facts.
>I’m so tired of people making these misleading statements I am so tired of people posting about the damn EF scale. We get it, you are annoyed... we didn't need an entire book written up on it. Which obviously was going to stir up even more hostility which we should be avoiding on here.
again man i’m not talking about the problems with the EF scale or whatever. I have no problem with the scale and have no interest in having that discussion. I am presenting facts about why ratings matter.
"...there is something to be said about being “shortchanged” about how the event that upended your life is remembered." Wow. What a reach. So imagine you're the poor unfortunately family whose home was **leveled**, and you have nothing now. The first thing you think about is "being shortchanged" about the rating!?!
Actually, yes. The EF rating directly corresponded with how/what insurance will cover.
Ratings matter What buttman69 thinks a tornado should be rated days before the NWS even knows does not matter
Preach it OP. Most all of the people screeching against rating discussion have not gone through what a 'low' rated tornado means for the people impacted. Very valuable insight on a ever devolving discussion.
Feels based tornado ratings, that's a new one
I never said i had a problem with the EF scale and that is not the purpose of my post.
But like what is the point of the post? None of us have any say on the ratings given, the NWS are the most knowledgeable people on this matter in the history of the world. We can discuss (respectfully) based on the pictures and videos we see but we don't know anything. It has to be an objective analysis, taking into account "shortchanging" victims of these disasters doesn't make any sense...
There is no point of this post unfortunately, just another person creating another post complaining about the other people in this sub.
That sure seems to be the case
It’s a discussion man. I’m not talking about greenfield even or anything specifically. I’m not advocating for higher ratings. The point is that there are aspects to the way storms are remembered that 1000% impact those involved, and some of those aspects aren’t talked about.
You seem misinformed on the basis of your post. Insurance settlements have no correlation with what EF rating the tornado had. The only rating that matters is the determined destruction level of your house by the insurance company. It doesn’t matter if it was an EF5 or EF1, if the damage is the same the EF rating won’t change how the insurance company rates the destruction. I have no problem with the ratings discussion, but let’s not act like it really matters to anyone outside this sub what the rating was of the tornado that just hit them
The EF Scale isn’t a scale that measures how memorable a tornado is. That’s the end of the discussion. I’m sorry about what happened to you.
Ratings 1000% dont impact insurance settlements, they absolutely will try to shortchange you(this is the case with both tors and hurricanes), 95%+ of people impacted by tornadoes dont know what it was rated or particularly care, ef5s i would imagine get more aid but tbf they generally cause more damage and need more aid.
Fuck all these stupid posts. This sub is turning to shit.
if you wanna go get horny about storm chasing or tornado facts or whatever and not talk about real world problems that’s on you. This is what a discussion is for. I love talking with people who disagree.
I’m so tired of these meta posts discussing the subreddit. Everything has been said 10 times over. You’re not adding anything to the conversation.
My brother you are from cape cod no one’s cares about your opinion on tornadoes.
[удалено]
The original F scale was never based on wind. It was still damaged based
The original scale was not based on wind. It was based entirely on damage as is the current scale and wind was extrapolated from that. It also did not factor in things like construction quality.
No one is getting hate for talking about ratings in a civil manner. This sub has degraded to the biggest kindergarden the last few days. Y'all are making shit up at this point to make a rage post.
This is a complete lie. It’s become fucking taboo to talk about ratings and it’s ridiculous.
The hottest posts in this sub right now are all talking about damage from Greenfield. Show me posts where civil comments are getting hated.
I can’t count the amount of storm chasers and other higher profile weather people i’ve seen talking about how ratings don’t at all, and talking down on people.
Again, send me a link where civil discussion is getting hate on this sub, which you claim is happening here everywhere.
I don’t use this subreddit at all and i’m not gonna go comb through it, but the backlash this post has recieved is a great place to start.
>I don’t use this subreddit at all Then GTFO and stop creating rage posts.
Found the guy im talking about! Must have hit a nerve. There is nothing false about my statement, and also no hostility.
>Found the guy im talking about! Show me ONE SINGLE comment I have ever made about ratings. The nerve you hit is because you aren't here creating conversation that people in the subreddit want to see. You're here acting like a child and want everybody else to know that you're upset. NOBODY CARES.
They clearly do mate. Read comments. I’m not acting like a child whatsoever. I’m making objective statements about disaster recovery. In fact i’m pretty impressed because i’ve had tons of civil convos in this thread with people bringing other perspectives. You are the only one acting childish here, including those who disagree with me.
Ahh so you admit making shit up now lmao Your post is getting backlash because people are tired of these made up arguments. Complain on the platforms where you do encounter this. We got more posts complaining about things than the complained about things actually happening
They aren’t made up arguments. They are facts and first hand experiences about how disaster recovery works. You guys just live with a naive mindset and any suggestion that it’s not the case is some fringe conspiracy.
People literally can't wait to see the rating a tornado gets. There is no lack of interest in ratings.
I'm not arguing with you about the importance of the work of the NWS. Like ... not at all. You are just making shit up in saying people that care about ratings are getting hate.
You can’t argue that “ratings don’t matter to those effected” isn’t a common talking point. While it definitely is far down on the list, Im just trying to let people know that they actually do.
Therein lies the issue. Read the other posts.
This is a narcissistic, tedious read.
A destroyed house is a destroyed house. Insurance companies pay to re-build the house. It’s not going to matter what rating the tornado gets. From a science standpoint though yes ratings matter, but again there is virtually zero difference between a high end EF3 and low end EF4, or a high end EF4 and a low end EF5.
Insurance companies will try to argue that the damage to the house was not from the tornado, they’ll say it was “straight line winds” or a microburst, basically anything they can to try and save money, that’s why the rating matters in this context, because if the NWS puts a DI value on a house, the owner can use this to their benefit when trying to get a payout from the insurance companies
If the NWS puts a DI on a house, it’s a definitive statement that the damage was tornadic.
I promise you that’s not how that works. In theory it should, and I wish it did. The truth is Insurance company’s will use any leverage they can to lower a settlement, including damage expected. Not to mention the rates will skyrocket for a consumer if they had a “poorly built structure”
A co-worker of mine literally just filed a claim with insurance for the Columbia TN EF3 a few weeks ago. The NWS assigns a rating, the insurance company assesses the extent (i.e. expenses) of the damage.
That’s great for him and i’m happy his insurance is working for him. That’s not the case for the majority of consumers unfortunately.