|
Post by Scumhunter on Sept 18, 2014 0:14:11 GMT -5
P.S. Now that I did this, I'm willing to bet money that one of the potential contenders winds up on one of the two lists after all.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Sept 19, 2014 8:01:21 GMT -5
I can't believe I need to say this despite all the disclaimers- but I am not John Walsh and this forum is not AMW. I received a forum registration asking for help with an unsolved murder- the person included their personal phone numbers along with a relatives and it was a claim about all the corruption involved in the case and who's covering it up and how the body is in some family's backyard and all.
The problem is I couldn't find the case anywhere on the internet. Not to mention, no way in heck I'm personally calling anyone I don't know off this site. I don't doubt the person's claim and I felt guilty rejecting the (very long) registration since it was desperately asking for help but I felt this wasn't the appropriate forum for it. Not sure what the appropriate forum would be, but we deal with cases already known in the media and can't post murder cases here without proof that they actually happened- regardless of if they were covered up or not. I hope the person finds help and if they come across this my suggestion would be to go to the media or contact the Unsolved Mysteries website.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Sept 26, 2014 15:09:46 GMT -5
So I was thinking about the forum exclusive missing children section and wondering about the high-profile cases like Hannah Graham and Relisha Rudd. The reason they're called forum-exclusive means the cases have not yet been aired on a national crime show, not that they're "exclusive" to us. But I still fear because of the title, people may complain we're calling them "exclusive." Hannah has not yet been aired on an AMW-type show but she has been all over the news. The same goes for Relisha Rudd, whose case was on Nancy Grace's nightly show. I assume Hannah's been too. I hate mentioning Nancy Grace but her show is technically a crime-themed show. Should I move Hannah and Relisha to missing on tv or is everyone ok with where they are now? Their cases have been on national tv, just not a weekly crime show. I just don't want anyone calling me out for saying they're "exclusives" when it only means they're not on any tv shows yet.
|
|
|
Post by HeadMarshal on Sept 27, 2014 17:26:49 GMT -5
So I was thinking about the forum exclusive missing children section and wondering about the high-profile cases like Hannah Graham and Relisha Rudd. The reason they're called forum-exclusive means the cases have not yet been aired on a national crime show, not that they're "exclusive" to us. But I still fear because of the title, people may complain we're calling them "exclusive." Hannah has not yet been aired on an AMW-type show but she has been all over the news. The same goes for Relisha Rudd, whose case was on Nancy Grace's nightly show. I assume Hannah's been too. I hate mentioning Nancy Grace but her show is technically a crime-themed show. Should I move Hannah and Relisha to missing on tv or is everyone ok with where they are now? Their cases have been on national tv, just not a weekly crime show. I just don't want anyone calling me out for saying they're "exclusives" when it only means they're not on any tv shows yet. I think the difference between say Nancy Grace and AMW/The Hunt/Unsolved Mysteries/Cold Justice etc. is that Nancy Grace is a live news broadcast program while the rest I mentioned are more pre-filmed news/documentary shows. So I feel it's fine to keep them in the missing person exclusive section, unless they say ended up on the new Unsolved Mysteries website.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Oct 1, 2014 10:25:37 GMT -5
This I had already been planning on since over the weekend and thankfully the capture of Dara Llorens has allowed me to do so. Every latest capture from AMW/The Hunt will get a mention link on the front page under the captures section description in addition to a thread update. The reason for doing this is not that I don't love them, but sometimes when someone comments in the capture contest or capture directory, or any other capture thread for that matter, it will bump the latest capture from the top of the page. I feel that in order to draw people in, I want them to know for sure what the latest capture is from AMW or The Hunt when they log onto the site. And if they are looking in particular for that latest capture, it is right there. I hope I have to update this again soon!
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Oct 16, 2014 20:10:28 GMT -5
Alright the person tried to register as "victormanuelgerena" and an hour later they tried to register as donaldeuegenewebb
And this my friends is the reason for the screening process as this person was an obvious troll and their ip has been banned.
I suspect I know who it is too. I told this former member I can't guarantee they won't slip by one day but that they would be banned as soon as they were found out. Why they continue to try nearly two years later is beyond me. They're more than welcome to read the message board if they want but I cant have them as a member anymore. False registrations may prevent even accessing the board (I think) so I suggest to this member that they not try again if they still want to read it.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Oct 23, 2014 10:22:04 GMT -5
This is the part that drives me crazy. I made a reminder post on Facebook about our website, a bunch of likes, but not one of those people who haven't already registered actually registered. I've even made posts saying please don't just like this status but join the site, and still, a bunch of people who like the status but don't join the site. It's MADDENING! LOL.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 2, 2014 0:07:27 GMT -5
Ok. This would be a MAJOR change and may fall into the category of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but this is just a question of if any member is intrigued by the possibility. When we first started, HeadMarshal suggested we break the fugitives down by decade. I thought I couldn't do that many with the old set-up but I've now learned I actually can. So instead of what our forum currently looks like, the fugitive cases would be broken down into decades. Unsolved and Missing I'll currently keep on it's own (once it gets to 10 or more pages, perhaps I'll consider changing that too). Below is what the forum would somewhat look like, except with content and probably somewhat lengthier descriptions it would probably be a little longer and would look more extensive. P.S. The link below is a side-project forum if I ever have the free time, but at least I can experiment with it right now: crimeshows.freeforums.net/Remember, this is ONLY a suggestion. I'm not going to do this unless other members really like the idea. Don't worry about the amount of time I took and think it means I'm seriously contemplating it, I was simply bored and it was just an idea I thought should be looked into. And this would not be instituted until 2015. (Unless the idea is so well liked we want to do it sooner). I do plan on changing recent to 2005-2015 and cold cases to 2004 and back regardless.
|
|
|
Post by HeadMarshal on Dec 2, 2014 9:12:56 GMT -5
I remember when I first suggested that idea. I feel that things are currently okay except for the large amounts of fugitives in the show recent (2004-2015) category.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 2, 2014 9:48:40 GMT -5
I guess that's my reason for contemplating this change as I feel things have gotten a bit too cumbersome and even cold case is a bit crowded. Even making it 2005-2015 might be a problem. One solution would be to make a 2000-2010 or 2005-2010 and 2010-2015 section. People may also be find to cases easier looking up by decade. But yeah, as you said, right now things are sort of okay. But remember, we're adding more fugitives day by day.
|
|
|
Post by HeadMarshal on Dec 2, 2014 10:07:08 GMT -5
Perhaps then the switch to this proposed format would be a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 2, 2014 10:11:45 GMT -5
As far as Exclusives go, the most recent section can include the site dirty dozen and public enemy list. But yeah, I'm going to continue tinkering with my guinea pig site and by January at the latest I'll probably change it.
|
|
|
Post by pakman on Dec 2, 2014 10:53:50 GMT -5
I'd be in favor of this! I'd like to suggest the following format:
Before 1980 (since it doesn't appear there are many fugitives prior to 1980, perhaps they could all go in this generic category) 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-present
This way it's arranged in a fairly logical format and one that's easy to access.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 2, 2014 11:08:08 GMT -5
I like it and that's pretty much the way it was going to look! (I put my guinea pig site in maintenance mode so unfortunately you didn't get to see it), with USMS and FBI under those categories and forum-exclusive fugitives below those. 2000-2009 may actually wind up with more pages in their own section which is ironic considering the problem I mentioned earlier but from a finding fugitives by decade perspective it would be easier. OK, I don't know WHEN I'll do this, it might be this month but will be no later than January but I will work on it.
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 2, 2014 11:11:31 GMT -5
This is what it would look like in addition to the other sections (I'd go current to backwards since I take it people want to look up more recent fugitives first):
AMW 2010-Present AMW 2000-2009 AMW 1990-1999 AMW 1980-1999 AMW Before 1980 FBI Top 10 US Marshals Top 15 Forum Exclusive 2010-Present Forum Exclusive 2000-2009 Forum Exclusive (Before 2000)
|
|