Hawaii Crime Watch

[Glen Miyashiro]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

Although I am gigling at what grunchley found regarding the restraining order filed by the wife who wants to start a crime watch website...it is not fair to his wife to post her name and the other information. It would have been sufficient to just say, "he has a restraining order filed against him by his wife."

Lynn, that wouldn't make a difference. It's like Karl Rove saying "Joe Wilson's wife" instead of saying "Valerie Plame". It takes almost no effort to learn that one is the same as the other. The bottom line is that the information is available in the public record, and the public record is extremely easy to look up these days.

[admin]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

This thread has gone from skeptical to simply malicious.

Yes, anyone is free to dig up dirt on anyone else on the Internet. That doesn't mean I want it posted here. My prior courtesy to the poster should have made this clear. Just because it's true, and because it's cheap fun, doesn't make it right.

There's a time and place for rallying the Internet mob in the name of truth, justice, and the American way. Harassing someone for what appears to be a well-intentioned, but poorly executed, website is not the same thing. I'm very disappointed.

[MadAzza]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

Such a stand up citizen that his wife filed a restraining order against him.

Big deal, my dog can file a restraining order. It doesn't mean the guy is guilty of anything. Restraining orders are sometimes filed in divorce cases as a preemptive strike, for example, or to keep things from getting overheated, to keep the parties away from each other.

[kimo55]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

.............

Anymore ideas? We would really appreciate it.
Thanks again.

H.T is your development team, apparently. Gonna give Pzarq major props fo dees o' wot?!

[kimo55]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

Harassing someone for what appears to be a well-intentioned, but poorly executed, website is not the same thing. I'm very disappointed.

I dunno;
They ask for the... ahem "harassment" by asking our opinion. and putting up a web site such as that.


It's a fuppeduck scenario all the way around. And we are supposed to be fulla aloha cus it's politically incorrect to point out inconsistencies in misdirected confusing web sites and question their motive.

It's all part of our screwy society; A web site pops up to, for the purpose of, as they say, combat, prevent or fight to any degree, any crime. Online. Except they also say 'call 911 for crime, don't use this site'
So people post what they see. Like a blog. what happens next?!
"hey. cop. I see a... what appears to be a crime. But not enuff of a crime to warrant calling 911. So i think it's a crime, but ain't too sure."
cop:
"sah-rreeee, we are busy standing on street corners giving tickets to people not wearing their seat belts..."

[lurkah]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

Appears to me like HCW came here thinking it might be a "nice local place" to announce the launching of their new well-intentioned community service website, maybe with the hopes of, at worst, receiving some constructive criticism, but at best received more destructive criticism instead -- a hard lesson I hope we all can learn something from.

[kimo55]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

maybe with the hopes of, at worst, receiving some constructive criticism, but at best received more destructive criticism instead --

I think they got what I assume most webmasters would want;
a scathing deconstructive review of the site. So there is no chance or at least very little, that when the site actually is up and running and promoted/advertised to the masses, there won't be alotta amateurish goofy glaring crap to repulse people by. A well thought out well designed site with correct grammar and spelling, containing a solid, succinctly well communicated direction and purpose, instills confidence in a web site's participants. IF... they are hypersentitive to this, perhaps they should seek another outlet for their creativity, such as building sand castles on a remote island...

[lurkah]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

I think they got what I assume most webmasters would want;
a scathing deconstructive review of the site. So there is no chance or at least very little, that when the site actually is up and running and promoted/advertised to the masses, there won't be alotta amateurish goofy glaring crap to repulse people by. A well thought out well designed site with correct grammar and spelling, containing a solid, succinctly well communicated direction and purpose, instills confidence in a web site's participants. IF... they are hypersentitive to this, perhaps they should seek another outlet for their creativity, such as building sand castles on a remote island...

Aloha!

WE just launched a new website / FREE public service called Hawaii Crime Watch. And are looking to get Hawaii's Online Community to assist Hawaii's Authorities by reporting (posting) any type of suspicous activity, criminal acts and things of that nature.

Let's help keep Hawaii safe for our future!

Mahalos ~
HCW Team
www.hawaiicrimewatch.com

Yes, you assumed they wanted a "scathing deconstructive review of the site". Sorry, but I'm not seeing it anywhere in their original post. Could it be a personal knee-jerk reaction to wanting to most always reply with an answer skewed towards being cynical and sarcastic? Your very first reply to me in the wrestling thread is a very good example. But, no baddah me. I can hando. Other folks might see that and never come back. Although that probably wouldn't bother you, it would bother me...because I'm not as "tantaran" as you.

[kimo55]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

Yes, you assumed they wanted a "scathing deconstructive review of the site".

yep, yer right, they didn't diRECTally ask for it. It is mostly implied. maybe unconciously.
It may simply be nothing more or less sinister (or innocent) than my eternal optimism when I see a site such as this to think they may be thinkin';
"hey guys, lookee here... whatcha think? give it yer best shot."
and we do.

and looka duh re act shun:
the site is down for remodeling!
huh.
I would say they got their money's worth.
woonchuh?

[scrivener]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I did say I was reserving judgment in my original post because this HCW thing seemed a little iffy. Kimo and LikaNui voiced some very specific, very meaningful criticisms. LikaNui and I both posted the name behind the website's registration (I just noticed that admin hasn't edited the name from my post). Craig said hey, let's ease up a little. The intentions looked pretty good to him. "HCW Team" (which appears to be the person named in my post) said thanks for the input; I'll definitely consider the suggestions and issues.

So far, it was perhaps not the most aloha-filled thread, but while the tone of some posts may have seemed harsh, the subject matter, especially from LikaNui, seemed to be in keeping with the purpose of HawaiiThreads. HT isn't meant to be a place where people just post announcements of their personal projects and that's it; that's why there's the "post reply" button. It's about conversation.

Grunchley's post certainly seemed below the belt and it did seem mean-spirited, but it wasn't entirely out of place; I'd assumed that the purpose of the HCW site was to put up information exactly like that, and I'm not a big fan of that sort of thing. It's true that anyone can file a restaining order and that an accusation doesn't imply guilt, but wasn't the entire content of the HCW site going to be accusations?

In any case, I didn't agree with Ryan's decision to edit the original info, but he's right when he says his doing so should have made it clear that this isn't what he wanted on his discussion board.

What's giving me an oojie feeling is that we don't handle stuff like this with much tact or gentleness. We did the same thing with the Bus Stories person, and while everyone had concerns worth posting, just as it did here, the concern turned to an odd hostility that didn't seem warranted.

I want people to tell us about their new web-projects. I want to feel free to praise or criticize the efforts. I just want us all to be able to do it with some degree of civility.

[kimo55]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

I want people to tell us about their new web-projects. I want to feel free to praise or criticize the efforts. I just want us all to be able to do it with some degree of civility.

I want world peace, too.

[lurkah]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

yep, yer right, they didn't diRECTally ask for it. It is mostly implied. maybe unconciously.

Or it might not have even been there in the first place. Unless you know the other party fairly well, it's always dangerous to assume anything. I'd like to give HCW the benefit of the doubt by thinking that they thought that their website was as ready as ready can be, and if they wanted to seek website-related opinions and criticisms, they could have polled a smaller audience, like maybe their own personal circle of friends, before making a "grand opening" type of announcement like they did here. Scrivener said, "What's giving me an oojie feeling is that we don't handle stuff like this with much tact or gentleness." That gives me an oojie feeling too, which I think it should. What's good about all of this is it gives us all a chance to "look in the mirror" and reflect on where each of us is coming from.

[Glen Miyashiro]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

What's giving me an oojie feeling is that we don't handle stuff like this with much tact or gentleness. We did the same thing with the Bus Stories person, and while everyone had concerns worth posting, just as it did here, the concern turned to an odd hostility that didn't seem warranted.

It depends on the nature of the project. In both cases you mention, I think the creators had it coming.

In the Bus Stories case, there were concerns raised about the guy potentially profiting off of others' work without their clear knowledge or permission. That seemed to me to be a reasonable thing to be critical of.

In this HCW case, I agree with Kimo and LikaNui that it's questionable as to exactly what kind of information the site would offer, and what value such information would offer. If it's actionable, then shouldn't you go to the authorities? And if it's not, then what have you got? Just innuendo and accusations.

I do think that posting the guy's old TRO was malicious, in poor taste, and not especially relevant to the discussion.

But I think the thing that set my hackles rising in both of these cases was that the creators of these web sites didn't effectively explain who they were, and what they were about. Over the Internet, where all that people can judge you by are your words, it's critical that you explain yourself when you ask others to give of themselves for your project.

[kimo55]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

Could it be a personal knee-jerk reaction to wanting to most always reply with an answer skewed towards being cynical and sarcastic? Your very first reply to me in the wrestling thread is a very good example.

dass cuz ya replied:
"Dang, I thought dat buggah wen mahke long time ago. "
which to some, may imply a wee bit of a quizzical sense of dissapointment.
("dang; he ain't dead!?")
ya know, li dat.
So... as is employed often and with good results, I respond with what you view as cynicism and sarcasm.
For the same reason it is employed for centuries in a worldwide scope;
to ferret out your true and real and expanded feelings. debate and discussion help solidify your convictions. If someone's stance is not clear, it may be pointed out, and in a fashion not quite accustomed to by some. Doesn't mean ya otta run and hide. or say "yer not communicating like i wanna"

But, no baddah me. I can hando.

that's what i thought, and that's why i threw ya something I thot you can hando.

Other folks might see that and never come back.

and that's their limitation and their lack of mental wherewithall or conversational backbone. Who wants weaklings in the ring who don't wanna be entertained?

[scrivener]

Re: Hawaii Crime Watch

It depends on the nature of the project. In both cases you mention, I think the creators had it coming.

I don't know about this. They certainly had the criticism coming, but they both presented ideas that were perhaps not very well-thought-out, and that by itself doesn't deserve hostility. A gentle "hey, have you thought about this?" is probably all it takes.