People hate on pessimists not because they’re wrong (since a lack of significant wintry weather is always more likely than significant wintry weather), but because their bias is clear, and because it is also clear that they relish the negative response from the hopefuls.
Two facts: people who post here hope for snow. And, snow events are becoming more infrequent. Therefore, performative, inert pessimism is more accurate than naive optimism over the long run.
However, since the realities I mentioned above are already implicit in this endeavor, dispositional pessimists, though they end up being right more often, are “raining on this particular parade”. To extend the analogy, you don’t have to go to a Red Sox bar with a Yankees cap on, even if the reality of the game is independent of what clothes you wear. The truth is: recreational weather discussion is motivated by hope for certain outcomes, and doomers will frequently “wear the hat” of the objective observer to rile up the subjective hopefuls, but often these people, like @jbenedet, make woeful predictions to serve the God of pessimism. The motivation becomes to frustrate the hopefuls, not to make correct forecasts.
It is possible to be a pessimist and also hold yourself to an objective standard of truth. The same is true for optimists or hopefuls. The reason why @40/70 Benchmark gets more respect on this board than someone like Omega or the Pope is because he releases outlooks and then grades himself on how accurate they were, even if it is clear that he wants a specific outcome.