News Articles

California & Hawaii Hotlist Questions and Discussion
#1

Just wondering the mass opinion of the large amount of news article links in the IA/Q&A threads.

I’d like to see a reduction in the amount of circulation of this content on the site. Or perhaps a thread created specifically to house them? Some of the sites require subscription and some are either false information or bad interpretation of the data collected, thus leading to a trickle down of misrepresented opinions.

I would be fine with a thread dedicated to that type of content because I would never need to scroll it. I also know maybe I’m the odd ball here so I thought I’d reach out to the community. I enjoy reading personal first hand information or opinions here through the users as it allows for some sort of accountability.

29 Likes
#2

FWIW (and two cents ain’t what it used to be) I like that idea. I can find news upon which I think can rely. These days reliably informed, intelligently written news articles are uncommon, IMO.

11 Likes
#3

I can relate to the frustration of seeing a potentially interesting article linked, and then find out it’s behind a paywall. Why bother sharing? If someone already subscribes to that publication, they’ve seen it…if they don’t, they can’t. I see that everywhere though, not just here.

6 Likes
#4

I understand that fully but this is not meant to feel like social media in my opinion. Especially in the incident specific threads however, if there was someway to corral all the likened posts of this manner and people were interested they could find them all in one place.

2 Likes
#5

I think a separate topic such as ‘Current Fire News’ or ’ News Releases would be great. It is a bit redundant. Many times almost identical articles are posted with much the same info. Most the articles posted contain the info we already have on here.

6 Likes
#6

I brought this exact topic up to a Mod who I know and is local. He said he would run this up the mod chain. He agrees 100%. The links are absolutely useless and unnecessary and just serve to clog up the threads and make them unreadable. I don’t mind the screen shots of fires and such….but the constant posting of news links has to go.

17 Likes
#7

This is a very California-centric site: nothing wrong with that! Numerous very large, non-California fires, the only real discussion of them is people posting links to news articles, same with present and predicted extreme weather. I appreciate the efforts of those who glean information and news articles (most TV stations don’t have paywalls) about fires, especially those burning anywhere but California. Even if I don’t click the link, just reading/seeing the headline gives me information and the opportunity to get better informed about activity that might be close to family members living elsewhere.

3 Likes
#8

There is the ‘California Fire News & Weather’ thread… but I like that how it currently reads… mainly just great weather posts. Maybe specific incident news section would be good? But, personally I’ll probably skip it

3 Likes
#9

Speaking as a mobile user that hasn’t spent more than a couple minutes total on the site I’m a normal web browser, I get the headline and a handful of words from most of the linked content, and find that to be enough most of the time. I typically scroll past almost all of the links to news stories with just a second or two of thought about it. A handful of stories have garnered a click, and I’m occasionally disappointed by paywalled content.

Overall, I find it works to scroll past here than on a social media site, and the user flagging seems to work fairly well. On Twitter/ X muting seems to be effective, and I’ve never felt the need to explore if muting or blocking is even an option here, as the admins and mods do yeoman’s work at keeping this a very valuable and mostly functional community. Haha!

EDIT:

There is in fact the ability to mute and block on the forums, so that may be a solution if you notice a given user is degrading your experience

2 Likes
#10

THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS - it unfortunately needed to be addressed.

I feel the same as you, and imagine many others. It has become frustrating recently when looking for updated information on an incident only to find the bulk of posts are just a link to news articles that usually offer less information than what is already available in the thread.

I would imagine most people using this site, both contributors and perusers, are capable of and already in the practice of looking at “normal” media sources for information on an incident.

This is where we come to give and receive intel from the locals and subject matter experts that is usually not presented to the masses via the mainstream.

I appreciate the efforts and commitment of those users that are posting such links, it just should maybe be directed towards a more appropriate / dedicated thread as suggested above by others.

Looking forward to what the @moderators come up with.

7 Likes
#11

Maybe the solution could be a new thread…something like " National fire and weather news links" where all the links in the world can go in 1 thread. Its infuriating to wake up in the morning to look for overnight fire updates and info only to see the top 12 recent posts were all news links on every different thread for that specific fire or area. I do not care about an arsonist caught on a 10 acre fire in Colorado. If I did…I have Google. Just my .02 cents

7 Likes
#12

I 100% agree. I have been a bit frustrated when I see “new posts” on a thread, and it turns out to be a news article link from last night. They have occasional “news” but most often are farther behind than the great scanner/first hand update others here share.

8 Likes
#13
3 Likes
#14

Thanks for this post as I have definitely felt the same way lately. I have also wanted to comment on this. It’s easy to pass on a post that doesn’t interest us, however when the article is linked to a post about fire information and strategies and tactics it’s hard to skip that post. It’s definitely been a busy summer with lots of important posts and info. I do however feel the articles take away from the true benefits of this forum. For the couple of weeks I have found myself missing the HOTLIST.

10 Likes
#15

And it just continues…

link
link701×661 67.6 KB

6 Likes
#16

Has anyone ever spoke to the person who post them the most?

6 Likes
#17

This site is very slow and sparsely posted since the meltdown of the old site years ago. I fear all these ideas to prohibit this or that type of posting could make it completely wither away. Maybe if more people would come post original content then a prohibition might make sense, but as it is any post seems like a good post.

5 Likes
#18

Maybe you should talk with @Flyron about this instead of starting a thread.

6 Likes
#19

Just to keep up with your concerns, the Mods are discussing the topic and will have a solution soon, please be patient. We also want the threads to be of value as it was on the Hotlist. We are working to maintain that integrity, it just takes a lot of time to prevent this site from becoming another social media platform and to offer real time pertinent information. That being said I would like to remind our posters to feel free to create an IA thread on any fire that is over 5 acres with a ROC instead of just creating a Q&D thread with limited info. On the old Hotlist IA’s, came first then the Q&D followed. Thank you for you understanding and commitment to the true value of this site.

17 Likes
#20

I understand that one of our community members is heavily involved in this activity however I’m not aiming this at an individual just trying to pull the audience to see if we can move the type of traffic in question to it’s own category.

I do realize it caused a snapshot to be uploaded but that was not the intention, also I think the thread was necessary to show enough interest to determine weather or not it should be addressed.

Maybe re-read the opening statement and you’ll see it’s well intentioned and I was trying to be careful however, if any offense was taken I apologize for the misunderstanding. But not the intent.

8 Likes