[wxqc] Analysis Question

H. C. Morgan h at aych.org
Thu Dec 11 19:23:02 CST 2008


Need to have some indicator next to the BIG RED X advising that the data 
has been verified and is believed to be true and accurate, and the 
viewer may disregard the BIG RED X.

HC / CW7453.


Ken Whelan wrote:
>
> Rather than interpreted flagged data as wrong,  think of your flagged 
> data as just being flagged for needing more analysis from a better 
> computer (a human brain) rather than a just set of rules that cannot 
> possibly take in all of the possible variations across the country.
>
>  
>
> Again as I said previously, it is just a tool for you to use to 
> determine if you have a problem.  That's it.   Others have said it 
> better than I can so I'll not repeat what they have said.
>
>  
>
> kw
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net 
> [mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] *On Behalf Of *Alan 
> Hensley
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2008 3:00 PM
> *To:* wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> *Subject:* Re: [wxqc] Analysis Question
>
>  
>
> "The results are not criticism of you weather station."  No it is not 
> criticism, the analysis just flags my data, flat out tells me I am 
> wrong and need to recalibrate my station.  It also tells me I can do 
> what I am doing, send out these emails and try to get to the point 
> that my data is accurate and reliable.  And if my data is already 
> accurate, find out why this automated analysis is flagging my reported 
> data.
>  
> Alan/KE8BP
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:02:01 -0600
> From: ken at ubh.com
> To: wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] Analysis Question
>
> I find this attitude disturbing.   The results are not criticism of 
> you weather station.   It is a tool to help you keep your station as 
> accurate as possible.   It is up to you to read the results of the 
> analysis and decide if the analysis is accurate and useful to you.  It 
> is a free service that many have put incredible amounts of time into, 
> you don't have to use it, quit sending the data in if it is such a big 
> joke.
>
>  
>
> My analysis in the summer reports as bad readings because of the 
> microclimate where my station sits.   I expect that and know my 
> readings are accurate.   I can look at the graphs and know if my 
> station is reporting normally or not.  
>
>  
>
> I have also had occasions where my station is reported as being 
> incorrect because another station is reporting badly.   I look at the 
> data, figure out I am not the problem and move on.   Again it is 
> simply another tool to use.   You can compare your station without 
> having to just go look at a bunch of stations and guess.
>
>  
>
> I am just a bystander, I know none of the people providing this 
> service personally.   
>
>  
>
> kw
>
>  
>
> Ken Whelan
>
> CW5627
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Suspicious message? There's an alert for that. Get your Hotmail® 
> account now. 
> <http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_broad2_122008>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> To search the archives: http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=008314629403309390388%3Aknlfnptih9u
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20081211/6e4eef9b/attachment.html>


More information about the wxqc mailing list