Quote:
Originally Posted by This'nThat
In my business, if that's the type of information and data I gave to my clients, I would be fired. If they don't have specifics, then they shouldn't be offering up the hype at this point. And Rose, even though you might be ok with their explanation of the scenarios -- please go back and re-read those explanations. They aren't based upon anything. All it was is an interesting discussion, without any basis whatsoever. This is all fluff at this point -- and they have decided to delibertly choose the most extreme scenario as their headline -- and that's what I call incompetant reporting to their clients -- us, the public.
|
Sorry, but I have to disagree. They're providing what the majority of the public wants. If they weren't, they'd be out of business. As a meteorologist, do I like that? No, not at all. I'd rather see more detail, which models are giving what storm track, etc., but I've gotten slammed on this forum for being too technical with my forecasts and they've probably had similar complaints.
Ardent weather weenies gave up on that channel long ago. There are better options. I would suggest you change the .com to .gov and use the forecasts that you're actually paying for. Read those forecast discussions and see if you like those any better.
And, out of curiosity, what business are you in?