Constructive Criticism = Personal Attack?

Why is it storm chasers respond so negatively to constructive criticism? There may be several answers, depending on who you ask and the chaser in question, but today's entry will focus on an experience I had last week.

While browsing youtube, bored (which happens quite often on this side of the calendar), I came across a video of a night time tornado somewhere in Mississippi I think (after the person's reaction to my comment, I have found I care less and less about the details of his YT offering). The video was ten minutes long (the full amount allowed by the popular video upload site for its users), which I thought kind of odd considering it was a nocturnal tornado (night tornadoes are split-second bits at the very best; to keep a person entertained for a full ten minutes with nocturnal video takes what must be, in my opinion, a very impressive and obvious tornado). However, curious, I clicked 'play' and began the journey that would eventually rob me of ten minutes of my life.

For starters, the guy's watermark was not just text, but text overlayed onto a gray bar, which was completely blocking the lower left 3/4 of the video (where the action area was, according to the audio and my inability to find anything remotely resembling a tornado). This in itself was annoying enough after a minute or so, but I stayed glued. Time after time I heard excited shouts of "tornado on the ground!" and eventually "wedge!" but could see nothing. I'm not sure if it was simply the bar blocking the screen, the fact he had horrible back lighting the entire time, or that there simply was nothing to see. Four minutes in, then five, then eight...I still had seen nothing resembling a tornado. Eventually I reasoned the guy must have included some still or slow-speed shots of the tornado, because it was obvious to anyone watching the clip, there was nothing that made the viewer point and say "tornado right there" in the real-time video. But alas, there were no stills, no slow-mo, just ten minutes of pitch black video with about four decent lightning flashes, none of which revealed a tornado (that I could see).

After watching the entire video, I made a few constructive critiques in a text comment. I suggested he (1) remove the watermark from atop the area of interest, and (2) include screen captures or slow-motion segments of the actual tornado. I never questioned his claim of a tornado, merely made suggestions to improve his clip so the viewer could see what he and his group saw live. The reaction I got was a long and detailed excuse of why he was incapable of the technology needed to do screen captures or slow-motion clips, which on its own I was prepared to accept and move on. But then he ended his paragraph with a smart ass "if I wanted advice on how to upload my videos to youtube, I would've asked for it."

So back to the topic. Why did he react so negatively? I made it clear I watched the entire clip, and that I was really wanting to see this tornado. I offered helpful hints to improve the clip so the viewer experience could match that of the author's as he saw it happen. I was not rude, snide, or in any way sarcastic. This leaves me only a few possible explanations to why this transpired as such.

Youtuber Syndrome : The disorder that seemingly 95% of all youtube users suffer from. Symptoms include believing everything they offer to youtube is video gold, automatically becoming extremely defensive and reactionary to constructive criticism of said videos, and making harsh and unwarranted comments to the author of said critiques before blocking them, therefore "ending" the discussion before the other party has a chance to reply.

There was no tornado in the video: A fact that causes a rapid, negative reaction from the author, as they become angry with the fact anyone would make any suggestion to event hint at what they already know: they're full of shit.

So what was the reason in my case? I'm apt to believe a combination of both. Nothing disappoints me more than being unable to engage a person in a debate they themselves started. In my not-so-humble-opinion, this is the real-world equivalent of punching someone when they're not looking or their back is turned. But life is full of these types, and I would do well to take my own advice (so often given to others) and just let it go.

But then what would I write about?

Perception = Reality = Fleeting

There's two things storm chasers are horrible at estimating: the distance they are from a tornado, and the importance of storm chasers to the general public. The latter inspires today's entry, as yet another rash of "impending legislative doom" speak is making the rounds on StormTrack.

Apparently this guy named Richard Heene is behind some sort of strange publicity stunt, the point of which is still unclear. Because the guy claims to be a storm chaser, and has made some television appearances as such, some of the ST community are in an uproar about how this is going to reflect badly on storm chasing. I don't think so, for a couple of reasons.

For one thing, Heene is so uninteresting, it took all the energy I have to even open up a second tab and make sure I was spelling his name right for this entry (in the end, it was my desire for quality posts that drove me to do the research, nothing else). The guy comes across as a certifiable whacko, which is one of the most boring and predictable (and easily-packaged for TV) personas out there. He's nothing we haven't seen a thousand times over, except that this dude comes attached with a "storm chaser" label. It's no different than "Twister", just one of a thousand horribly unrealistic but wildly entertaining adventure films, all of which had the chaser's seal-of-approval until they made one about chasing. This all points to the second reason I'm not even blinking about this story.

Many storm chasers have some kind of delusion of grandeur they matter to the world at large. I've never understood how this came about, especially when you consider that 80% of StormTrack itself doesn't care enough to even post. Is this because many chasers are also internet addicts, introverts, social retards, and often-times virgins? The type of demographic, oh-so-common in today's world, that basically live their lives online? This would seem to make sense, because this person's opinion of what the "world" is would be everything they see on their computer screen (like this perhaps).

I'm not here to burst anyone's bubble, but get over yourselves. People don't care who storm chasers are, what they're doing, or anything about them. They're no more boring or exciting than railfans, skydivers, or mountain climbers. You don't see those activities being the focal point of an investigation when someone who partakes of any of them are in the public light for something completely unrelated. What a person engages in is background noise compared to what they've done to earn their fifteen minutes of fame on CNN, Fox, and all the other excuses for news in the 21st century.

When someone like a doctor or lawyer is convicted of murder (and it's happened before), people don't just stop going to see doctors or using attorneys. When teachers and preachers are convicted for child molestation, people don't stop sending their children to school or to church (well, maybe the Catholics). And these are positions that actually matter to society. Doctors, lawyers, teachers, preachers, all important social positions in our world. Storm chasers? What are those?

So relax StormTrack people, chasing isn't going anywhere because some whack job decides to be Darwin's top candidate for 2009 and calls himself a chaser. You have to remember, this is CNN, Fox, and America. Those three ingredients were specially-crafted for the 3-minute attention span. In a month, people will stumble onto this blog entry and ask themselves "what is he talking about?"

StormTrack: What Really Happened

I'd like to use this entry to talk about what exactly transpired on StormTrack a few days ago. My original comment about the Reed Timmer worshipers was the catalyst for what became, if we're going to be completely honest, the most entertaining few days that lost and wandering forum has seen in some time. But in the ensuing melee, two things were severely misunderstood: (1) I was never taking personal shots at Reed Timmer, I was taking shots at his army of admirers. (2) My original comment was perceived as "out of context" when it in fact centered on a very popular storm chasing topic...it just so happened my opinion was in the minority. Allow me to expound on each point.

I get tired of things quickly. I don't care who, what, where, how, when, or why (did I get them all in there?), I don't like seeing or hearing about the same thing over and over. I don't want to know what my neighbor is doing constantly, what my mom is doing 24/7, or even what my favorite band's members have going on at a given moment. I just don't care. Now, let's add to this the fact it's a storm chaser in question. I'm a storm chaser too, in fact my life revolves around it, so I'm far more concerned with my own day-to-day happenings as opposed to someone else who is doing the same thing. I don't have the time, energy, or (most importantly) the 'give a damn' to keep up with Reed Timmer's every move. It doesn't mean I hate Reed, or that I'm saying "fuck you Reed", it simply means I'm too worried about my own thing. Nothing more. That people thought otherwise on StormTrack, is simply missing the context on their part.

Now add in the fact this is all happening on a storm chasing/enthusiast forum, and it becomes even more annoying to me. People on StormTrack are exposed to the exploits of any number of storm chasers on any given day. So why is everyone so worried about what Reed Timmer is up to? What makes this one chaser so special among his peers that his every move (including an obscure, ten-minute half-assed interview on NPR) is front page news? Do these people not have their own chasing business to attend to? Are they not chasers at all and in fact just Reed Timmer fans who sit glued to Discovery every Sunday in the Fall? The fact is, I wouldn't know by the responses (I didn't get) on StormTrack. Instead of answering my very legitimate question, chaos ensued.

The first thing that went awry were the supporters of my opinion, who mistook my words to mean I had a vendetta against Reed himself. A day after my nonchalant comment that I'd already forgotten about and moved on from, I come back to see a gathering mob of folks who were jumping on the Reed Hate Wagon that the first responder to my post had conjured up by mistaken inspiration through my original comment. Then someone wanted everyone to line up and kick Reed in the groin. I sat reading that entry and was like "Nooooo, you are missing the fucking point!!!" So then I responded to this in an attempt to actually defend Reed (an action that apparently nobody noticed while busy chastising me for my bad attitude and jealousy towards Reed "via my original comment") and at that point, thought I had extinguished any possible flames. I couldn't have been more wrong, as an all-out war erupted between those who were wanting to kick Reed's groin (those who misunderstood my original post and ran with it) and those who were defending Reed's honor (taking aim at me instead of "Mr. Groin Kicker"). So after one casual comment, a flame war started between two sides who both believed I was the epicenter of the fight...when in fact the haters were misguided and the defenders hung the wrong guy.

After everything had run its course, I was banned for the umpteenth time (no longer able to defend my side of things), and the dust had settled, the complaints about my original post started. "I can't understand why people have to be negative", and "This thread was about a radio show, why do people have to post off-topic stuff?" Negative is the opposite of positive, and they cannot exist without one another. Just because a post isn't joining the throngs of happy-go-lucky followers, doesn't make it any less significant to a given thread. If all everybody did on StormTrack was just agree with each other (and that's the direction they're heading) then what would be the point of a thread anyway? One person makes a post, followed by 34 pages of "yeah me too!" C'mon. If you don't like reading negative material, then stop reading. Not everyone drinks the Kool-Aid every time. It's time some people started to understand this, especially those who are reaching middle-age status (might explain why they spend so much time on forums and message boards). I mean, you do know there is no Tooth Fairy, right?

And what do you mean off-topic? Isn't the topic Reed Timmer? Of course it is. It's not NPR, or radio shows in general, it's Reed Timmer. So the fact I posed the question to his forum of followers "what's the draw?" was completely and utterly on-topic. Just because my opinion was "negative" (aka minority) does not make it off-topic. Stop looking at just what I said, and start looking at where it was said: a thread mentioning some obscure radio interview most of StormTrack would've never known about, save for the fact it was posted_on_StormTrack_as_a_thread. Which is the whole point to my post being where it was in the first place: why is it everything this guy does makes front page news on this forum?

I'm not apologizing to anyone for my StormTrack post, or the subsequent fall-out. I post intelligent questions. I can't control how people will react to them. For all the coal-raking that's been done with my name the past few days on that forum, you'd think some of those folks who replied could've just turned away from their keyboards and walked. Practice what you preach, StormTrack, because I'm always going to be the person on your forum who provokes thought, emotion, and change...that is unless the day finally comes when the ST Brass grow a set and ban Shane Adams for life.

But the smart money's on me.

Judge Not

There has been much conversation throughout the years over "storm chaser" versus "tornado chaser". The popular point-of-view is that being a storm chaser brings some kind of mysterious nobility to an individual, while being a tornado chaser automatically qualifies a person as a mindless adrenaline junkie, who "just doesn't get what chasing is all about" and "fails to understand the 'entire chasing experience'". I say hogwash.

Choosing to make the tornado their primary goal does not make a person some Mountain Dew-swilling, extreme freak. Not when you think about it. Anyone can find a storm. You can be thirty miles away and succeed in storm chasing. All it takes is a semi-decent forecast (or a good guess) and you're there. But while succeeding on that storm from thirty miles away, you could be missing a tornado. To be there for that show, you'll need to do a little more than just roll up on a thunderhead from one hundred miles distant. Tornado chasing requires not only good forecasting, but a good understanding of storm structure and behavior in close proximity, in a real-time environment. There's simply more skill involved all the way around.

The next point is success itself. Do so many chasers really prefer chasing storms over tornadoes? Or do these people simply like the much better odds for success, given a mere storm qualifies as a win. I know it's true in some cases because I've read it. People admit they are storm chasers because they can't deal with the long odds of success against a pure tornado chaser. Fair enough, but IMO, this speaks volumes about a person's overall dedication. To even consciously consider your chances of being successful when questioning why you're out there, is, to me, the reasoning of a person who is far more practical than passionate. Someone who looks at a chase as a business decision, not a quest for personal pleasure; "Do I really think it's worth spending the money?" instead of "Do I think there could be tornadoes in Iowa today?" (without a thought for the expenses involved). There's nothing wrong with either line of thinking...but it does beg the next question.

For the practical chaser - the storm chaser - what's the drive? What can possibly motivate someone to spend thousands of miles on the road and hours of personal time on something that is just a hobby? Something that exists, if we're being truly honest, to simply take up time? Perhaps I'm too flawed in my character to see this objectively, but I just can't fathom putting so much effort into something that wasn't a huge part of my life. Then again, there's golf. An activity which, in the case of several chasers, is very much like storm chasing. It's a way to blow off steam, to clear one's head, to maybe finalize that big deal that's been sitting on the table. A distraction. But there's the flip side of the practical (storm) chaser...the artist, the dreamer. Otherwise known as a photographer.

Photographers are the pure storm chasers, the ones who target storms but possess the passion necessary to be tornadoes chasers. However, their passion lies with the challenge of capturing the perfect image of a storm, not just trying to find a tornado. They do the miles, they see the storms, but, like a tornado chaser, their opinion of what constitutes a chasing success is a small sliver compared to the basic, practical storm chaser. A beautiful storm witnessed but not captured on film (or digitized, as it were today) to one's personal standards, can make what the practical storm chaser would call a great day into an average one, or even a bust in extreme cases. Much the way a tornado chaser would consider the same event a bust without observing a tornado from said storm. Like tornado chasing, storm photography requires a heightened skill not needed for mere storm chasing.

And what about skill itself? It no doubt takes more skill to consistently capture tornadoes than it does to capture mere storms, that is not arguable. So why then, is the tornado chaser made out to be the antithesis of what he really is? Let's look at who is pointing the fingers.

Scientists: PhD wielding curmudgeons (sometimes themselves storm chasers) who consider tornado chasing to be nothing more than a pursuit of self-glory, largely because the media has latched on to "tornado porn" the past decade. Therefore, anyone who pursues tornadoes out of personal passion is automatically lumped into this category, tailor-made and hand-crafted in the bowels of the Ivory Tower. No amount of explanation (as if one is needed) or reason can change these minds...hence the term "curmudgeon".

Photogs: Though this term is widely used simply as a synonym for "photographer", I choose to use it as a kind of knock on those who value structure over tornadoes, to the point where anyone who chases for tornadoes is "not appreciating the storm itself". This opinion never fails to produce rising bile in my esophagus. Not appreciating the storm itself? Because a person chooses to focus on only one portion? It's not like someone can dry erase everything but the tornado. An appreciation of the entire storm is quite necessary for successful tornado chasing, because these magnificent creations are the mothers of the tornado. One simply cannot waltz up to a mama bear and swipe away one of her cubs. At least not without losing the other arm in the process.

Culturists: Those who not only chase for the storms themselves, but equally-enjoy the open roads, beautiful scenery, small towns, and people of the Great Plains and Midwest. For these people, the "entire experience" is the draw, and they can be perfectly happy with an otherwise busted day storm-wise, when stumbling upon some natural artifact or field of sunflowers to gaze upon and perhaps photograph. "You're not appreciating the entire experience, you're so lost on what all chasing has to offer." Again, hogwash. Just because a person chases to see tornadoes doesn't mean they don't appreciate the journey. Because there was no specific mention of a chaser's encounter with a stray buffalo in the chase report does not mean that moment in time was not special to said chaser. Hey folks, as "spiritual" as you are, let's try to look past the trees and see the big picture, instead of judging a book by its cover.

The fact is, in some small capacity, each of these groups and their opinions are correct. But the bigger truth is, they incorrectly lump all tornado chasers into this group. This simply isn't the case. Some of us who chase tornadoes do so because we just love to see the aesthetic beauty of the tornado itself. Because we love the challenge of trying to find the most elusive phenomenon on earth. It's a lot more cerebral and a lot less cock-n-balls than most detractors would believe.

So to the scientist, don't hold the tornado chaser's high standards of (what is considered) excellence against him...you would do well to mirror that dedication and passion in your own endeavors. To the photog, don't let the tornado chaser's passion for the pup lead you to think he's no compassion for the mother, for one cannot be had without the other...as an appreciator of the Big Picture, you would do well to consider this and incorporate it into your line of thinking. And finally, to the culturist, to the lover of The Entire Experience, let not the tornado chaser's lack of mention bring you to believe he doesn't appreciate every wonder along the way to tornadic bliss, for the tornado chaser keeps these cherished moments inside his heart and mind, to be enjoyed on a personal level...and understanding that, as one who appreciates it all, should come naturally to you.

Mox Nix

This blog is what I should've done four years ago when I started blogging. For years I struggled with the identity of my blog, torn between day-to-day happenings and strictly chase-related stuff. I tried each, but neither felt right. Going back and forth between the two, the reader never really knew what to expect on here. I know some people enjoy that "unknown" aspect, but as the writer, I'd prefer my little spot on the world wide web, reserved just for my thoughts, have an identity. Thus, I decided to do away with the old Passion Twisted blog (whose name, although convenient, always seemed a cheesy play on the very original 'Passion Twist') and start anew, with a fresh outlook...hopefully in the right direction.

What this blog will be is, what I believe to be, the perfect combination of me and chasing. The writing style you'd expect from me, including controversy, honesty (are they really two different things?), introspection, and of course, all on the topic of storm chasing and all it encompasses. This is not a blog to keep people informed of my day-to-day chase happenings, but rather, my general thoughts revolving around my favorite topic. More like a column in the newspaper (you younger folks will need your parents to explain to you what that is).

I don't promise the reader this blog will be prolific, or even updated regularly. All I will promise is honesty, to whatever end. So without further delay, welcome to Mox Nix.