"Philip Eden" philipATweatherHYPHENukDOTcom wrote in message
...

snip


The Met Office quickly discouraged its employees from
contributing, although I was never quite sure whether that was
because the newsgroup was created by that evil Philip Eden
and therefore must be inherently evil itself, or just because
they simply feared the freedom it provided. Whichever, they
still actively discourage involvement, which I think says more
about them than it does about us. And more power to the
dozens of MO folk who do post here but still feel the need
to do so anonymously. Exeter, evidently, is still a Warsaw Pact
country.


Not quite true Philip. The Met Office does *not* discourage its employees
to post here. All it asks is that employees who post here do not discuss private
Met Office business,
nor act as spokesmen for the Office, which all sounds perfectly reasonable to
me. There are a few
Met Office people who post on here using their own names, and you know who they
are. Recently your apparent
hatred of the Met Office seems to have grown, I'd really love to know what
they've done to upset you so much?

But I wonder if I am alone in thinking that uk.sci.weather's
best days are behind us. People come and people go, but we
have lost many regulars in the last 2 or 3 years, and several of
them have let me know the reason for their departure. I almost
followed the same route last year for the same reason. Others
prefer to use their kill-files.


You not going to share the reasons then?
I personally think the newsgroup has improved over the years although I do
feel that science suffers from time to time.

It is not the village idiots who irritate, it is the pub bores.
Just one or two ... ego-trippers, grandstanders, self-obsessed,
self-justifying, verbally incontinent, and like most pub bores
they probably won't even recognise themselves from this
description. That they might be widely kill-filed would
astonish them.


You get those on every newsgroup, UK.sci has its share but I think perhaps less
than other groups.

This might, therefore, be a good opportunity for everyone to
re-read the newsgroup's charter. It is absolutely not a list of rules
which must be obeyed; rather, it is a set of guidelines whose
objective is the happy continuance of this newsgroup:

quote
This group is essentially for the discussion of daily weather
events, chiefly affecting the UK and adjacent parts of Europe,
both past and predicted. The discussion is open to all, but
contributions on a practical scientific level are encouraged.
It may also contain postings of observations during
interesting weather episodes. The group is expected to be
patronised by both amateurs and professionals (including
academics), but it is primarily for weather enthusiasts rather
than research scientists. Any discussion of climate issues
should be from a scientific standpoint and not a political
(environmental-activist) one.
unquote


Thank you.

By all means criticise me or my words, but please be
constructive in your criticism. And if the end result is that
uk.sci.weather returns to its best, and old friends turn up
again, I shall be happy. And I promise no more proprietorial
throwing my weight around for another ten years.


Good :-)

Thanks for your efforts in setting this group up, it's bloomin marvelous.

I'd really like to know what you feel is wrong with it now though?

Will.
--

" Ah yet another day to enjoy "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A COL BH site in East Dartmoor at Haytor, Devon 310m asl (1017 feet).

mailto:
www: http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...antage_Pro.htm

DISCLAIMER - All views and opinions expressed by myself are personal
and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------