|
7/9/2007 7:36 PM
|
#1
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 379
|
RE: By Popular Demand
Thanks David. The listing of posts since my last visit is great. I always did like that feature and missed it.
I also appreciate having the archives of the old forum easily available.
|
|
8/28/2007 8:32 PM
|
#3
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22
|
RE: By Popular Demand
I appreciate the hard work and think I'm going to like being a member here.
|
|
9/17/2007 9:22 PM
|
#4
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 213
|
RE: By Popular Demand
Just out of curiosity, will there ever be any way for certified arresting officers who aren't, in fact, sworn officers, to get into the locked sections of the forums? I'd like to think that, even though I'm just a lowly 'rent-a-cop', I was able to contribute to some of the threads on the old board, and could contribute here, also. I'm sure there are other certified arresting officers around who aren't sworn in who could also make contributions based on their own experiences. And isn't that one of the purposes of the board? So those who have gone through the grindmill can help those who haven't with the wisdom they gained the hard way?
|
|
12/16/2007 8:50 AM
|
#5
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 27
|
RE: By Popular Demand
What about sending private messages to one another on the boards, can we get a function added. I see some names that are in my area and don't feel that it would be right to create a thread to call someone out when it should be taken to PM's. Just a suggestion.
|
|
1/6/2008 9:17 AM
|
#6
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 125
|
RE: By Popular Demand
This forum is dead! Where there are no criminals, there is no debate. What happened, how sad. Have you all fallen asleep yet?
|
|
3/5/2008 10:20 PM
|
#7
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 511
|
RE: By Popular Demand
I have a problem with this process as well. I commented on Joe Wambaugh last nite and now I can't find the link to the article or comments made about him or his books.
|
|
3/6/2008 7:03 PM
|
#8
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 379
|
RE: By Popular Demand
Here is a link to the article on Wambaugh and his books:
http://www.policemag.com/Blogs/Editors-Notes/2007/10/19/Joseph-Wambaugh-The-Storyteller.aspx
The trick to remember is that the comments on the articles do not show up in the forum, but stay with the articles. You need to use the home page to find the articles through the various channels.
As for your comment, I also like Grisham and read most of his stuff. He has improved on his writing since he started. I skipped his stories that were about real crime because I prefer the thrillers. If you like his thrillers, I recommend Lisa Scottoline. She is another lawyer writing crime thrillers about what she knows best and does it well. The trick to hers is that many use the same characters so you need to find the order of the stories to truly understand some of her references. You can read them out of order but she does sometimes put in references to earlier adventures for that character.
|
|
3/6/2008 9:34 PM
|
#9
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 511
|
RE: By Popular Demand
Thanks Steve. I have a comment to make. I am with the "lowly rent-a-cop" about getting into the cop only forum. Sometimes people on the outside, like myself have the education and perspective that might be useful to active law enforcement. One captain in the sheriff's department told me I had more degrees than a thermometer, and I can say my educational background is very diverse. I love to mix up debates, stir thought processes. So, I hope you will consider our lowly request...:) BTW thanks for the info on Wambaugh.
|
|
3/9/2008 8:33 PM
|
#10
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 379
|
RE: By Popular Demand
I hope you did not think I was ignoring this post. I really read it and have thought about what you said. I just realized I needed to clear up one misconception about me.
I am a frequent poster and probably the senior (longest active) member of the forums. I helped for a short time as a forum administrator of the old forums but I have no authority within the new forums other than as a poster. I do like to keep it more active and will make posts about the current issue when no one else does.
As for the police only area, I will give you a history about the issue and what I know of the current state. When Police magazine started, it limited its written publication to only active and retired law enforcement officers. There has long been a theory in law enforcement that we do not want our tactics and secrets made public so the criminals will not learn about them. I believe the magazine is still fairly restricted, though it might be a little more open than before.
When the Internet grew and the magazine started a web site, it had the whole area open to everyone. We were hit by some hackers and spammers. We also have quite a few non law enforcement posting, some of whom were very anti-law enforcement and openly admitted their criminal records. Many officers answered surveys that indicated a desire for a secure area within the forum that officers could use to discuss sensitive issues. This was implemented as part of the redesign of the forums a few months ago.
Since the new forums were implemented, there has not been as many of the old posters active on the forum. Some don't like the new format and some were not allowed to see the secure area and decided to go elsewhere. One of the real problems with the secure area is how to verify a retired officer as allowed in (no way to verify his current employment was the problem I believe).
Anyway, that is why there is an area you cannot get into, and I recognize (and I believe the magazine staff do also) that in the effort to provide the readers what was asked for, sometimes we exclude people who could make a very valid contribution. I think they should re-examine the issue in light of the low participation, but we would still have a problem then. How do we get an area that is secure and allows us to discuss sensitive things without excluding people that might make a valid contribution? It is a problem where the line has to be drawn somewhere, and either excluding all non-current LEO's or excluding no one seem to be the two best options. I don't like the last because we really need an area to get some information out that is secure, but I don't like the former because of who we exclude. I am open to suggestions,as is the publisher.
|