Eric Martindale

All About Forensic Psychology

New video to promote The All About Forensic Psychology website. I originally built the the website as a student resource for an undergraduate course in forensic psychology I wrote and delivered.

Highlights on the website include:

A detailed and clear account of what forensic psychology actually is. Important because of the way the subject has been distorted, sensationalised and inaccurately presented in books, films and on TV. See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/what-is-forensic-psychology.html

A series of information pages on criminal profiling. A fascinating subject to learn about in iteslf but also important to know of its place within forensic psychology; for example is criminal profiling a realistic career goal? See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/fbi-profiler.html

The Forensic Psychology Degree Directory. A great resource for anybody thinking about studying forensic psychology. See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/forensic-psychology-degree.html

Free full-text articles. A wonderful collection of publications including a special "Inside the Criminal Mind" collection showcasing all the major articles written by members of the Behavioral Science Units, National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, at the FBI Academy. See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/forensic-psychology-ebook.html

I really hope that you find all the information and resources on the All About Forensic Psychology website useful and engaging.

All the best

David

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/

All About Forensic Psychology

New video to promote The All About Forensic Psychology website. I originally built the the website as a student resource for an undergraduate course in forensic psychology I wrote and delivered.

Highlights on the website include:

A detailed and clear account of what forensic psychology actually is. Important because of the way the subject has been distorted, sensationalised and inaccurately presented in books, films and on TV. See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/what-is-forensic-psychology.html

A series of information pages on criminal profiling. A fascinating subject to learn about in iteslf but also important to know of its place within forensic psychology; for example is criminal profiling a realistic career goal? See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/fbi-profiler.html

The Forensic Psychology Degree Directory. A great resource for anybody thinking about studying forensic psychology. See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/forensic-psychology-degree.html

Free full-text articles. A wonderful collection of publications including a special "Inside the Criminal Mind" collection showcasing all the major articles written by members of the Behavioral Science Units, National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, at the FBI Academy. See following link.

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/forensic-psychology-ebook.html

I really hope that you find all the information and resources on the All About Forensic Psychology website useful and engaging.

All the best

David

http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/

Thered!! How the heck are you?
I have a lady friend that is working on a website and I believe she could use your expertise. Harlan

Airport wifi is the worst. I have to find some website that doesn't enforce SSL, so you can hijack the unencrypted HTTP request? Really now?

RT @martindale: Airport wifi is the worst. I have to find some website that doesn't enforce SSL, so you can hijack the unencrypted HTTP req…

RT @martindale: Airport wifi is the worst. I have to find some website that doesn't enforce SSL, so you can hijack the unencrypted HTTP req…

+Sean Thomas I checked with +Derrick Minor and he verified the time on the website in the sub-title field should have read EDT.

I completely agree. Although I am not one to moan and complain about someone else's hard work, I did let out a little sigh of confusion when I logged on to Facebook and saw the changes. I actually did exactly what the first gentleman in the video said: I clicked right through the bubbles, not really caring and considering them more of a hinderance. Obviously websites are going to change, grow and evolve - but it often leads to irritation and confusion when it's so sudden. I feel that all the negative feedback for the Netflix split is a similar situation. You had a great point about Twitter allowing change-seekers to go ahead and refine the new Twitter - what a great way to listen to your user base about what works and what doesn't.

So, entirely not in light of any recent events, I was integrating the chat rules that Vexar wrote into RolePlayGateway's Rules, and I was looking for some examples of forum etiquette that other forums use. In searching, I found this perfectly humorous video:

(I found it on Neil Boortz's website, but since headed over to videojug to get the original. PS, Neil? You're awesome.)

That was probably the best one I found, above and beyond the video I came across that seemed geared towards the Steam forum community, which was a bit too NSFW to actually embed here on my blog. If you'd like, you can go check out posting a new thread on AlbinoBlackSheep.

I'm admin on several online forums, and I'm a moderator on many more; not counting the countless other communities where I'm an active member. I was pretty proud of the rules I put together on Gateway, and I think they're clean, simple, and easy to follow. No one likes being bombarded and tacked down by rules, so I try to keep them as simple as possible. What do you think of them?

How do you manage forum users and set rules? I know Martin Reed has some good tips on forum rules, and there are many others out there that learned a lot from running forums. The best thing that we can do is learn from others, and gather experience on how to handle these issues. What is your approach to forum etiquette?

Just caught this over a MySpace (gasp!) bulletin. Actually, I'm lying, Shannon called me when she posted this to make sure I saw it. Because you know I wouldn't have.

Girls - pick the first guy on your top friends.
Unless their family than pick the next one.
Guys - do the same, but the first girl .

- Don't change it
- Enter their name
- Be honest
- Repost this so your friends can do it too

1. Who is it?
...Errriiiccckkk.

2. How did you meet?
6th grade, baby. We go back.

3. If you were crying would this person cheer you up?
Always.

4. Where is this person?
Wendell

5. Have you ever spent the night with this person?
I've crashed at his place. But not with him. We don't roll like that, s0n.

6. Will this person repost this?
Lol, Never.

7. Is this person family?
Yup. Always will be part of it.

8. Do you trust this person ?
Uh Hu. He knows me better than anyone.

9. If you could change something about them, would you?
Nope. Well, I'd make it so he called more often. But we're both so damn busy.

10. Does this person live close to you?
5 minutes away.

11. How much does this person know about you?
TOO much...=). Just kidding.

12. What would you do if you were stuck in an elevator with this person?
We'd probably do stuipd shit so the people monitoring the elevator cameras
would be laughing their asses off. And then I'd probably be fussing him out, saying this was all his fault and he'd just sit there trying to take apart the damn elevator keypad and claim it was something he's always wanted to do. What a retard... ;)

13. Do you argue with this person?
God yes. And we fight. I'm Talking an all out BRAWL. ;)

14. If you guys went to jail together, what would it be for?
Running from the cops. Hacking into some top secret government website. Aiding and Ebedding. TRYING to get into Lake Royal. ha...

15. Do you want to see this person right now?
Sometime soon, Yeah. I miss him =(

"MY TOP BOY"- if you're a girl and "MY TOP GIRL"-if your a guy

I love you too, Shannon. You're... mostly correct. On which parts... I'm not at liberty to disclose. :D

There's been a lot of active discussion about the state of AOL's directory project, DMOZ. There have been many attempts to unseat the directory project from its position as the most authoritative listing resource, such as the Yahoo Directory. Many of these attempts have fallen by the wayside, as Rand Fiskin points out, but none have remained more controversial than DMOZ. More recently, Chris Crum's post on WebProNews about his lack of respect for DMOZ has stirred up a hornet's nest of DMOZ criticism, including a particular post claiming DMOZ is a waste of time.

I forwarded a lot of this on to Philip Nicolcev, known by username as "frug", who is the editor of several roleplay-oriented categories on DMOZ. He responded to me directly with a highly insightful email, and I was fortunate enough to receive his permission to share its contents.

I've been editing the pbp category at DMOZ for what... 4 years now? About that. This article is a big whiny complaint which misses the mark. They are both correct and sadly mistaken. Yes, dmoz is outdated and yes, it fails because of attitude problems, but not silly allegations of 'corruption' or people who are bitter because they didn't get listed. We don't list everything, I don't list even half of the submissions I get, and anyone who has been an administrator or an editor for a similar type of project knows better than to take these kinds of complaints seriously. One thing they say is definitely correct: Apply once carefully following their rules if you wish and then, as Will suggested, forget about them.

This is exactly the approach that should be modeled for any directory, regardless of its state or condition. When you are submitting a link to a directory, you are being offered the privilege to be listed as a resource by the owners and management of that directory. They are not obligated to list your link, let alone review it in a timely fashion--but this would be genuinely appreciated and would reflect on the directory's position as a "good" resource.

DMOZ is the primary source for Google's Directory, and you must respect the opinion of such a large and successful company. It's obvious that the idea behind an open directory like DMOZ is good, but where they fail is in execution. More on that later.

He continues:

That is what you should do. Apply once and forget about it, don't claim anybody is corrupt because whether you believe my opinion or not, there's no corruption. Nobody cares enough about dmoz anymore for it to be valuable for extortion. Don't be ridiculous. Furthermore if you were to speak to some of the senior editors you'd discover that they are pretty damn uptight, even obsessive. The problems with dmoz are, in my opinion, twofold. First off, you have the dated trashy look of the website which is a relic of the 1990's. It's not user friendly, it doesn't entice anyone to go browsing, and it hasn't adapted or added features that would help people understand the structure of the directory or find what they're looking for. The editor forums still use phpBB2, and you should see the editing panel. You wouldn't believe how dated this stuff is. Frankly it has needed an overhaul for years now.

I largely agree with him. The phpBB team deprecated the phpBB2 branch at the beginning of this year, ending support for the outdated platform. AOL would do well to do a complete overhaul of the site's design now that "Web 2.0" has come and gone (and I could reference posts all day on that) - and AOL has completely missed their opportunity to latch on and ride the wave.

Philip finishes his correspondance with the frightening truth that has been plaguing many post-Web2.0 sites and services:

The second problem, attitude, is partially the cause of the first problem. It's a stagnant atmosphere where nothing gets done and nobody gets listened to. They would rather leave a directory as a cluttered mess of garbage than risk breaking its structure by overhauling it. Fixing my category took me about two years before I had approval to restructure it, and I'm in a small niche category nobody pays much attention to. Since becoming an editor I have deleted about 60% of the outdated links listed. Had I not joined, they'd still be there cluttering things up with linkspam geocities pages from 10 years ago. So yeah, dmoz is failing, but not because of corruption or because some guy didn't get what he wanted. And, honestly, if the author of this article was applying to dmoz just to 'test how fair it was' then I'm glad they rejected him. Somehow they made the right decision because he's wasting their time.

And that's the exact problem - the DMOZ community has completely stagnated, which has resulted in the puddle of goop that the directory has become. In my personal opinion, I think that AOL could do a lot better job at community management (all reputation management aside) by setting up a more rigid structure of responsibility. The editors need to be held responsible for a timely review specified by their superiors, and there needs to be cross-checking of the editor's work by other qualified editors.

Is this another example of AOL's purchases being mismanaged and ultimately being forgotten, such as what many people claim is the case with ex-Nullsoft product WinAmp? Perhaps, but I think that remains to be seen. After all, even our favored Google took a questionable amount of time to convert phone-consolidation service GrandCentral to the new Google Voice after its 2007 acquisition. DMOZ was in fact originally a Netscape project, which then-strong AOL acquired in 1998. Since that acquisition, little has changed.

All said and done, DMOZ needs some love if it's going to survive as anything more than a relic of trust and authority in the Web 2.0 bubble. As Philip points out, it has both good and bad traits and deserves further attention, but it needs to be attention in (and from) the right direction. The questions remain; where has AOL been? What can be done about the editors (or lack thereof)? How can DMOZ be improved?

I had a pleasant conversation with a Mac fanboi, this morning.

(08:51:01 AM) Linux User: Do Macs come with an SSH server by default?
(08:51:12 AM) Mac User: bluh...huh?
(08:51:19 AM) Mac User: just woke up
(08:51:22 AM) Linux User: Oh, lol.
(08:51:26 AM) Linux User: Good morning, sunshine.
(08:51:30 AM) Mac User: lol
(08:51:40 AM) Linux User: I've been at work for an hour. ;P
(08:51:57 AM) Linux User: Anyways - does the default Mac have an SSH server?
(08:51:57 AM) Mac User: now...what are you babbling about?
(08:53:25 AM) Mac User: no, but ssh is supported for X11 apps
(08:54:22 AM) Mac User: ....x11 being the x window environment in the Mac OS
(08:54:47 AM) Linux User: Right.
(08:55:22 AM) Linux User: So - X11 applications can SSH to other locations?
(08:55:58 AM) Linux User: And - what's the Mac equivalent of a repository, and/or aptitude/apt-get/yum?
(08:56:01 AM) Mac User: I really don't know, I haven't messed with it
(08:56:12 AM) Mac User: what the fuck are those?
(08:56:46 AM) Linux User: I can go to the command line here, and say... "apt-get install " and it'll download and install that program from the repository.
(08:57:53 AM) Mac User: ...99% of Mac users don't go "Command-Line Commando" on their system....
(08:57:59 AM) Linux User: Also, if the program has any dependencies - it'll get those, too.
(08:58:00 AM) Mac User: so...enjoy that....
(08:58:11 AM) Linux User: Oh, it has a GUI, too.
(08:58:22 AM) Mac User: website?
(08:59:02 AM) Linux User: It's a core component, it doesn't particularly have its own site.
(08:59:22 AM) Linux User: Mac doesn't have an application finder and installer type thing?
(08:59:24 AM) Mac User: of what?
(08:59:27 AM) Mac User: no
(08:59:30 AM) Linux User: Weird.
(08:59:38 AM) Mac User: OMFG!!!! NO!!!! WHAT WILL I DO!???!?!?
(08:59:51 AM) Linux User: I was trying to install openssh-server on a friend's mac...
(08:59:57 AM) Mac User: y'all pc ppl always find the weirdest off-beat shit to pick at
(09:00:05 AM) Linux User: Mac's are PCs to, ho.
(09:00:16 AM) Linux User: Understand the word Personal Computer?
(09:00:21 AM) Mac User: uh, by the definition "personal computer" only
(09:00:38 AM) Linux User: PCs also don't have to run Microshaft.
(09:00:43 AM) Mac User: but be it known that a pc is a pc and a Mac is a Mac
(09:01:01 AM) Linux User: Considering Macs aren't "Macs" so much anymore, without the kooky PPC crap.
(09:01:10 AM) Mac User: ?
(09:01:42 AM) Linux User: They're regular PCs, now. I can install Windows on a Mac, I can install Plan9, MacOS, Linux.
(09:01:52 AM) Linux User: They don't use PPC anymore, right?
(09:02:05 AM) Mac User: you can't remove the Mac OS, though
(09:02:10 AM) Linux User: ...want to bet?
(09:02:13 AM) Mac User: yup
(09:02:16 AM) Mac User: go ahead
(09:02:20 AM) Linux User: LOL.
(09:02:31 AM) Mac User: remove the Mac OS, and then lemme know what you plan to do
(09:02:35 AM) Linux User: Anyways - MacBook pro - does it have more than one button?
(09:02:45 AM) Mac User: FUCK NO!!!!
(09:02:49 AM) Linux User: Alright, nevermind then.
(09:02:58 AM) Mac User: now, shoo
(09:02:59 AM) Linux User: I was going to buy one, because they're sexy.
(09:03:01 AM) Mac User: go buy a dell
(09:03:22 AM) Linux User: Dell is increasing their Linux support.
(09:03:23 AM) Linux User: :)
(09:05:19 AM) Mac User: that is to say that they now have some kind of linux support?
(09:05:52 AM) Linux User: They've always had Linux support, but it's been somewhat hidden.
(09:06:00 AM) Mac User: pphhhht
(09:06:12 AM) Linux User: They're increasing client awareness of the option, now.
(09:06:29 AM) Mac User: ya know, it really doesn't mean anything to me
(09:07:11 AM) Linux User: I was considering purchasing a Macbook and installing Ubuntu on it, for my laptop.
(09:07:25 AM) Mac User: I can run any other OS I want, should I happen to have a sudden drop in IQ, and my machine is pretty awesome.....so....
(09:07:55 AM) Mac User: why would you buy a Mac to run something you can run on a dell?
(09:08:01 AM) Mac User: why?
(09:08:04 AM) Linux User: Because Macs are sexier?
(09:08:08 AM) Linux User: I don't want an ugly dell.
(09:08:23 AM) Mac User: uh, yeah, and at least half the "sexier" is in the GUI
(09:08:28 AM) Linux User: Not at all.
(09:08:35 AM) Linux User: My GUI is 100% more teh sex.
(09:08:45 AM) Mac User: ......wow
(09:08:47 AM) Mac User: um
(09:08:48 AM) Linux User: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzb3MSp82Vs
(09:08:49 AM) Mac User: no
(09:08:51 AM) Linux User: :)
(09:09:05 AM) Linux User: You can't install Beryl or even Compiz in MacOS, can you?
(09:09:46 AM) Mac User: ooh....pretty....gimmicks.....
(09:10:08 AM) Linux User: Oh, is there an equivalent of workspaces in MacOS?
(09:10:17 AM) Mac User: in Leopard, yeah
(09:10:24 AM) Linux User: That's this next version, right?
(09:10:30 AM) Mac User: yizzur
(09:10:34 AM) Linux User: Awesome.
(09:10:43 AM) Mac User: "Spaces"
(09:10:49 AM) Linux User: Lol.
(09:10:59 AM) Linux User: We Linux folk have had that for years.
(09:11:00 AM) Mac User: http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/spaces.html
(09:11:01 AM) Linux User: But anyways.
(09:11:15 AM) Mac User: again....I don't care, and you're the only one who noticed
(09:11:34 AM) Linux User: LOL. Awesome argument. :x
(09:11:43 AM) Mac User: I don't argue anymore
(09:12:03 AM) Mac User: If you've bigoted yourself into using PC
(09:12:10 AM) Mac User: s, thats ur own fault
(09:12:44 AM) Linux User: Well, if I can't "uninstall MacOS" - or heaven forbid, order it without MacOS, like I can order most PCs without any OS, for a significant price reduction...
(09:12:49 AM) Linux User: It's not worth getting a Dell.
(09:12:52 AM) Linux User: Or any "PC".
(09:13:02 AM) Linux User: Or an Apple, for that matter.
(09:13:08 AM) Linux User: Dell, I can do that with, though.
(09:13:17 AM) Linux User: I share your Microsuck hatred.
(09:13:18 AM) Linux User: I really do.
(09:13:23 AM) Mac User: you make that sound like a feature
(09:13:24 AM) Linux User: But I also hate MacOS with a passion.
(09:13:32 AM) Mac User: for no reason
(09:13:37 AM) Linux User: No, for full reason.
(09:13:42 AM) Mac User: there's 2 sides of the fight, dude
(09:13:46 AM) Linux User: It's a *nix OS, without all the good stuff.
(09:13:48 AM) Mac User: Apple, and mico$ith
(09:13:57 AM) Linux User: Then there's Linux. ;D
(09:14:05 AM) Linux User: We're not part of the fight, we've already won.
(09:14:06 AM) Mac User: you're out in the woods trying to be a nonconformist
(09:14:22 AM) Linux User: Not at all, actually, I started using Linux because most of my friends were.
(09:14:23 AM) Linux User: :/
(09:14:28 AM) Mac User: yeah, 2% market share. WOO HOO!!!!
(09:14:36 AM) Linux User: 55% of the server share. :/
(09:14:48 AM) Linux User: I think it's above 60, actually?
(09:14:58 AM) Mac User: http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/
(09:15:01 AM) Mac User: > you
(09:15:16 AM) Linux User: Why, exactly, would I run MacOS as a server? When I have Linux?
(09:15:23 AM) Linux User: You don't have a package manager (apt)
(09:15:40 AM) Linux User: apt-get install apache2 php mysql
(09:15:42 AM) Linux User: Done.
(09:15:48 AM) Mac User: you wouldn't
(09:15:58 AM) Mac User: and that's your business
(09:16:04 AM) Mac User: why are you talking to me again?
(09:16:20 AM) Mac User has signed off.

And that was him blocking me. Mac people really do think differently.