Donating back to NUS: here’s how Two Saturdays ago, the Straits Times ran a story on alumni donations back to local universities and I was quoted in two paragraphs of the story talking about NUS. Today, I was finally asked by a colleague who read that story whether I really disliked NUS that much. While the story might have given that impression, the truth is, I gave a very long interview and said alot more things which, taken together with the parts attributed to me in the story, will give a very different impression. I do not blame the journalist because I believe she had her own considerations in crafting her story and besides, there’s still the editor on top of her who can change her story. Anyway, just to put things in perspective, I did say I threw away donation appeals from NUS but I also said the reason is because the name NUS does not have much affinity with me. NUS is a big institution with many schools and departments. What I have an affinity for is not the institution NUS but the school and department I was with because I spent the bulk of my undergraduate days with them. I noted that I would have given much more serious consideration if the letter came not from NUS but from my school (Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences) or my department (Communications and New Media). The reason is because NUS is so big and fragmented that students no longer identify themselves primarily as an NUS graduate but rather, they identify themselves as a graduate of their school or department. This might appear as weird but I do talk alot more fondly about my school and department than about the institution called NUS. I was also quoted giving the example of a fee increase during my undergraduate days and how that episode made students feel NUS was out of touch with them. However, I also noted that NUS has markedly improved in the next following years and there have been many more consultations with students on impending decisions that could have a big impact on them. I also said this is a step in the right direction and will certainly help students feel that NUS cares for them and in turn, this might improve alumni donations in future. The later half of what I said wasn’t published. Also, I gave my suggestions during the interview as to how alumni donations can be greatly increased. I noted that students have greater affinity for the schools or departments they were with and NUS should consider working with schools and/or departments to appeal to students to donate money. I think there is a greater chance of success if the school’s dean, the department head or perhaps even a very long-serving and popular professor makes an appeal for donations. I would hesitate to donate to NUS because I don’t know whether my donation would go to my former school or department, or will the money be used for other purposes. However, if I am donating to my former school or department, I do know that my donation will probably go towards benefiting the entities I want my money to benefit. I think a big part of why alumni are not responding to calls for donation is because the university is not doing targeted soliciting. It is important to know what kinds of appeal works with which kinds of alumni. Sending generic donation appeals is akin to randomly shooting in the dark and hoping that something gets hit. I told the reporter if my department head or a professor I know wrote me an appeal for donation, I would donate. Similarly, if my dean sent an appeal, I would give very serious consideration. I am not sure if I should be thankful to the reporter for not publishing the secret to me opening my wallet but I believe this is the secret to opening the wallets of many alumni. Albert Einstein’s thoughts on society Albert Einstein is famous for being a physicist but it seems that he has plenty to say outside of physics. He has many interesting thoughts on society and here are some quotes taken from his book, “The World As I See It” (1949), which I think is worth pondering. Two quotes on political systems: “My political ideal is democracy. Let every man be respected as an individual and no man idolized. It is an irony of fate that I myself have been the recipient of excessive admiration and reverence from my fellow-beings, through no fault, and no merit, of my own. The cause of this may well be the desire, unattainable for many, to understand the few ideas to which I have with my feeble powers attained through ceaseless struggle. I am quite aware that for any organization to reach its goals, one man must do the thinking and directing and generally bear the responsibility. But the led must not be coerced, they must be able to choose their leader.” An autocratic system of coercion, in my opinion, soon degenerates. For force always attracts men of low morality, and I believe it to be an invariable rule that tyrants of genius are succeeded by scoundrels. For this reason I have always been passionately opposed to systems such as we see in Italy and Russia to-day. On the need for a military: He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilisation should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder. I have plenty of food for thought for the rest of the week. Pro family policies: as good as it gets The newly unveiled measures to encourage Singaporeans to have more babies is about the best that the government can offer to help couple remove financial hesitations with regards to having babies. Of course, some people will say that more can be done and should be done but I think the government has offered a fairly generous and reasonable package of incentives and there really isn’t much left that can be done. While money is no longer a big obstacle to having babies given the rather generous handouts, there are other concerns that I have which the government cannot possibly address, and I don’t expect the government to even try. It’s a personal battle that I have to fight together with my wife. Unlike a few generations ago where the mentality towards having kids leans towards “have them first and worry about bringing them up later”, I think these days, particularly among the more highly educated Singaporeans, the mentality has reversed. One can point to many factors that cause this reversal but the point is, the reversal in mentality is here to stay. And, I am unable to (at least not yet) convince myself to adopt the mentality of the folks from my grandparents’ era towards having kids. There are a couple of personal reasons for this. The biggest reason is the high level of competitiveness in schools and I’ve seen for myself the kinds of tremendous negative consequences such competitiveness have on people I know. I will not provide details to protect the identities of the persons I am referring to but it scares me. Seeing such cases have enlightened me and while I might not pressure my future kids in school, the level of competitiveness in schools might just make my kid voluntarily pressure himself/herself. I would hesitate to blame the education system for providing pressure on students, though. I think it’s more of parents who are causing voluntary pressure in kids. Some parents send their children for all kinds of tuition and enrichment classes and children do share such experiences with classmates. If the majority of the kids in the class have extra tuition and enrichment classes, kids who don’t are going to be seen as an anomaly and they will feel pressured even though these kids might have enlightened parents who are trying their best to avoid pressuring the kid. Such a pressurized education environment isn’t something the government can address with policies. And of course, there’s National Service for boys. I’ve been through National Service and it’s not completely bad. I learned quite a few things out of it. However, I didn’t have a choice. And I want my son (if I have one) to have a choice. If I cannot let him have a choice, then I rather not have him in the first place. I understand the rationale for having compulsory military service but I don’t want to have my kid already have the decision made for him. I didn’t have a choice and I don’t want him not to have a choice as well. So, the bottom line is that while there are no financial disincentives, there are other personal reasons not to have kids. The quality of childhood life is an important consideration in having kids, and now that I think about it, it is perhaps a more important reason than the financial cost of bringing up kids. I guess Singapore is a great place to work in but when it comes to raising kids, I am not quite certain. Anyway, I think I still have a few years to think. Maybe I will change my thoughts in time to come as I experience more and learn more but right now, I don’t think I want to have kids, at least, not here. Taking someone’s ass to be your face The title of this entry is a the literal translation very famous Hokkien (a local dialect) saying, which goes something like this when romanised: gia lang eh kar chng di bin per. This saying is typically invoked to poke fun at people who have no shame and have no qualms about taking the glory of another and passing it off as their own. This saying succinctly sums up the feeling of some Singaporeans about the Olympics silver medal effort by the Singaporean women table tennis team in the 2008 Beijing Olympics. All members of the team were born in China and grew up there before they were lured by Singapore into taking up a citizenship here. Even though they are Singaporean citizens now, I believe some of my fellow Singaporeans think that the victory says more about China’s ability to produce talent than our ability to win by our own efforts. Does it really matter if the athletes who won the medals weren’t born and raised here? Actually, I don’t think it’s a problem. Singapore was, historically, an immigrant society and it is not uncommon to welcome people from other lands to start a family here and call this little island home. The only problem for me with regards to sports is that Singapore generally goes out and pick out those who have already shown potential to give them Singaporean citizenship. This explains why I’m much more delighted with swimmer’s Tao Li’s performance than the table tennis team’s achievements. Tao Li came to Singapore to study English before she was discovered to be a talent in the pool. At the very least, she wasn’t deliberately imported to win medals. Of course, her temperament does need some moderation but that’s a story for another day. I would liken Tao Li’s case to that of Anastasia Liukin, the American Olympic gold medalist gymnast born to Russian parents. The Americans didn’t pluck Liukin from the Russians only when she showed promise of being a world champion. Liukin moved to America when she was very young and started playing around in her parents’ gymnastics club while her parents, both world class gymnasts themselves, were coaching other kids. Her talent was recognised only after she got to America so I think the Americans can certainly bask in the glory of Liukin’s achievements. While I’m happy for the women’s table tennis team, I’m hesitant to celebrate this ‘victory’. I’ll wait for Tao Li to bring home an Olympics medal before I start to celebrate. I don’t want to be gia lang eh kar chng di bin per. Share the road? Sure, but learn the rules first. The quote by avid cyclist and Safe Cyclist Task Force (SCTF) member Leo Tan in this newspaper report kind of irked me. According to the report, he supposedly said the new signs that are going to be put up to alert drivers to cyclists ‘stand as symbolic recognition by the state that motorists must share the roads with cyclists‘. He seems to imply that motorists do not want to share the roads with cyclists and therefore the state has to give symbolic recognition that cyclists do have a right to cycle on the roads. I don’t have a problem sharing the road with cyclists. But, I have a big problem with cyclists on the road because from my experience, many of them do not follow traffic rules. I have lost count of the number of times I’ve had to jam the brakes in order to avoid hitting cyclists who beat the red light. I’ve also seen a number of cyclists on the road who cycle and talk on their mobile phone at the same time. And, some cyclists are obviously inexperienced and swerve left and right when cycling but they insist on cycling on the roads anyway. Seriously, if we want to allow cyclists on the roads, they need to learn AND obey traffic rules. Cyclists who do not obey the rules not only endanger themselves, they endanger other road users. Cyclists are not covered by motor insurance (at least to my knowledge). If they cause accidents, they inconvenience other people because the motorist cannot make claims against them. And if cyclists do get into an accident, the probability of serious injury is higher because many of them don’t seem to want to wear helmets. I think cycling is a good alternative mode of transport but until there is a proper mechanism to regulate cycling behaviour on the roads, for their own safety and for the sanity of motorists, please take the cyclists off the road. I’ve had enough scares from nonchalant cyclists who think that they are exempt from traffic regulations. Politics and sports MM Lee has now likened politics to sports in invoking the comparison of teams competing in sports divisions to political parties competing in general elections. It is an interesting comparison, no doubt, and there is certainly some truth in what MM Lee was trying to point out. Indeed, a team that is in division one is usually of much higher calibre than that of a team in division three and if one has to bet on a winning team, it’s a safer bet with a division one team as compared to a divison three team. However, when I think about his analogy, it doesn’t make sense to me. How do we know if a team is of division one calibre unless there are other teams around to compare with? Therefore, I disagree that it is wrong to vote for alternative political parties for the sake of it. Without a basis of comparison, how do we know whether a team is a division one team or a division three team? Being the only team in the only division of a competition says nothing about the calibre of the team. If MM Lee is serious about wanting to lay claim to the PAP being a division one team, all the more he should encourage people to vote in alternative teams so that there is some basis for comparison. And, he should be also calling for lowering of barriers to entry to the competition. Otherwise, he does not have a reasonable basis of claiming the PAP being a division one team. The price of growing up It’s been more than a year since I’ve gotten married (you would know if you’ve been diligently looking at the counter to your right), and it’s more than half a year since I’ve got a place of my own and moved out. I’ve also graduated for a year now and have been working since I graduated. Looking back at the past year, a lot has happened, and the transition from being a student to a working adult is certainly a big one. When I was a student, there are many things that I never had to concern myself with but now that I’m a married and working person, I realise there are many things to juggle by myself which my parents used to take care of. A large number of things that hit you when you’re working and married concerns money. When living off parents, mortgage repayments, utility bills, conservancy charges, tv licenses and other expenditures are in the furthest recesses of the mind. Only when you move out to a place of your own you realise how much all these add up every month, and you wonder why you have to incur so much costs each month just for being alive. And before you even start wondering about incurring these monthly expenditures, you are already hit with the 10% down payment for your home and a five-figure renovation bill (these days, given inflation and all, the cheapest renovation will set you back at least $10,000). For someone who just started working, you find yourself penniless, or worse, in debt because you have to take a home renovation loan. It gets even worse if you took a tuition fee loan and computer loan during your university days. Now that you’ve started working, the financial institutions are all too eager to start you on your monthly repayment. The end result of all these is that you never seem to be able to accumulate much in your bank account. The pay comes in and then in a week, 50 percent or more is gone. When I was young, I wanted to grow up so badly. Now that I see and feel the price of growing up, I wish I can be a permanently carefree teenager. The sad state of blogosphere I hate to say this but the local blogosphere is in a sad state from the perspective of blogosphere as an avenue for serious discussion of socio-political issues. There are many bloggers making use of blogs as a platform to discuss issues of importance to society. However, I think the readership of all these ’serious’ bloggers combined cannot even match that of Xiaxue. She claims to have 50,000 readers a day after having an online spat with another high profile blogger. I have nothing against blogs that style themselves along the lines of tabloids. I just find it sad that people are actually more interested in gossip about celebrity bloggers than in serious issues. In the past, one could make the argument that Singaporeans do not engage in active socio-political discussions because of high barriers to entry to publishing. However, blogs changed that but still, celebrity gossip trumps socio-political discussions in terms of popularity. If most people reading blogs are more interested in Xiaxue versus Dawn Yang, then the establishment isn’t going to take comments from socio-political bloggers too seriously since they aren’t really much of a threat. This just means that discussing socio-political issues online isn’t really worth doing because the impact isn’t there; the establishment doesn’t take the socio-political blogosphere seriously. I guess perhaps the best thing that the PAP has done to make the average Singapore apathetic is to give a roof over the head and a full stomach. I think the average Singaporean will only become interested in socio-political issues if they are starving or they have to sleep on the streets. This is also the reason why I think Singapore will never experience the kind of political tsunami that Malaysia recently experienced. Poverty and hunger drives people to desperation. And desperate people will have a greater propensity to do anything that appears remotely capable of making their situation better. As long as Singaporeans are kept generally well-fed and sheltered, Xiaxue versus Dawn Yang will always be more interesting than politics and social issues. Red or white Since this week is National Day week, I’m going to write another entry regarding National Day. During the National Day parade, Singaporeans at the parade location are always decked out in red. However, members of the PAP are always dressed in white as far as I can remember. This is something I find very interesting. Why are they not dressed in red? Of course, half the national flag is white so it really isn’t a problem to be decked in white. However, I just think that being National Day, everyone should be united and wear the same colour, and that includes politicians. It gets a little discomforting when leaders try and differentiate themselves from the rest of the populace on National Day. And, it doesn’t help matters that white is the party colour of the PAP. In wearing white on National Day, are the PAP members trying to subtly hint that the party and the country is one? Of course, the list of possible interpretations can go on but I think it would be nice if PAP members switch to red during National Day parade. It may be a symbolic gesture with no practical purposes but it is a nice gesture. At least I would appreciate it. Political logic It seems one of the counter arguments Singapore’s political leaders like to make when responding to criticisms about Singapore is that critics, particularly those hailing from “Western” styled liberal democracies, have no experience at all when it comes to running a government. So, to the Singapore government, the only way critics are allowed the license to talk is when the critics have had experience with governance. It seems that experience is pretty much a pre-requisite to the government. That being the case, why are Singaporean ministers being paid millions? In order for our ministers to talk about and formulate policies for majority of Singaporeans, shouldn’t they experience what the average Singaporean experiences in order to make policies that makes everyone better off? For starters, the ministers should get a massive pay cut to 5% of their current salary. Next, we should house them in 4 or 5 room HDB flats, depending on how big their family is. Next, they should be banned from owning a car so that they can experience being sandwiched in overcrowded trains and buses. Maybe the water and electrical supply to their homes can be cut from time to time too. Without such drastic measures, our ministers cannot possibly be experienced enough to formulate good policies. We really should give our ministers the best possible experience of being an average Singaporean. Addendum: Someone said to me this entry sounds like an angry rant. Actually, it is not. Look at the tags. The NDP propaganda I’ve stopped watching National Day Parades for a long time. As a kid, I used to be very excited over them. However, as I grew older, they got boring. Sure, the organisers try to do something innovative every now and then but these are just cosmetic effects. The boring thing about NDP is that the story is the same. It’s the same old fairy tale of how Singapore climbed from third world to first by overcoming tons of obstacles and adversities under the capable leadership (of the PAP). It gets really boring to hear the same old propaganda every year. It would be perhaps a little too much to compare NDP to the kinds of massive, feel good parades that Hitler used to do for his fellow Germans more than half a century ago. However, I cannot help but feel some similarities. At each NDP, the “Singapore Story” is replayed over and over again, but which version of the story are we hearing? My take is that we are hearing what those in power want us to hear and hope for us to believe in the story. Unless I need some mental anesthetic, I’ll probably not watch NDP ever again. Of race and religion laws Reading the Singapore Statutes Online, I find that our Penal Code Cap 224, Article 298, is very interesting. It says that: “Whoever, with deliberate intention of wounding the religious or racial feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object in the sight of that person, or causes any matter however represented to be seen or heard by that person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with both.” I absolutely understand that lawmakers mean well when drafting and approving this particular law in the Penal Code. Unfortunately, it is my belief that things can get really messy should someone decide to challenge the law the meaning of “wounding religious or racial feelings” is highly ambiguous. There are probably many more scenarios other than the following ones that I can think of which illustrate the complexities of “wounding religious or racial feelings” but I think the following hypothetical scenarios will sufficiently illustrate the degree of complexity involved with this law. Scenario 1 A person of Chinese race and Singaporean nationality hurls some verbal racial abuse at a person of Chinese race and China nationality. Under this particular article in the Penal Code, is the Singaporean guilty of wounding the racial feelings of the Chinese person from China? Similarly, if a Singaporean Malay hurls verbal racial abuse at a Malaysian Malay, is the Singaporean Malay considered to have wounded the racial feelings of the Malaysian Malay? Scenario 2 If a Christian, in proselytizing his/her religion to a Taoist, deliberately says that the Taoist acts of idol worship is wrong and a major sin, and the Taoist is offended by the remark, is the Christian considered to have wounded the religious feelings of the Taoist? In scenario 1, the big question is whether can people have their racial feelings wounded by someone of their own race. In scenario 2, the question is, how do we determine intention? To one party, there is no feeling of any intention to wound the religious feelings of the other person. However, the other person feels that there is an intention to wound his/her racial feelings. Of course, as a lay person, I could be misinformed. Perhaps to the lawyers, the law is crystal clear. I don’t know. I just think that issues such as race and religion are hard to regulate and such a broad law has too many grey areas, even though the law is well-intentioned. How to avoid being convicted of sedition It seems that Gopalan Nair is now being charged for sedition. According to the Sedition Act (available here), it seems that Nair has only four possible defenses against the charge of sedition. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), any act, speech, words, publication or other thing shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that it has a tendency — (a) to show that the Government has been misled or mistaken in any of its measures; (b) to point out errors or defects in the Government or the Constitution as by law established or in legislation or in the administration of justice with a view to the remedying of such errors or defects; (c) to persuade the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Singapore; or (d) to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes of the population of Singapore. I think point C is quite interesting. Let’s have some hypothetical scenarios: Person A thinks the government is corrupt. He then goes on to publish and distribute a publication to other people accusing the government of corruption. Does it mean Person A can get away with it by adding in a line somewhere that encourages people to vote the existing government that is corrupt in his eyes out of office? Afterall, voting out an existing government is a lawful way of resolving the matter. Person B is a racist. He publishes all sorts of racist remarks and distributes them widely. In each of his racist publication, he encourages people of his race to lobby their representatives in the legislature to pass a law that marginalise other races. Can Person B get away with publishing the racist comments? After all, he is not asking people to riot and create unrest but rather, he is encouraging the use lawful procedures to enforce his racist beliefs. I don’t have the answers. It’s just interesting to read that “any act, speech, words, publication or other thing shall not be deemed to be seditious” if there is an “attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Singapore”. If anyone reading this entry thinks that this entry has a seditious tendency, please note I’m writing this in the spirit of point B. Lax editorial standards at Today? Uncle Yap took two snapshots of two different versions of the Today newspaper on the arrest of Gopalan Nair. The story essentially remained unchanged but the headline changed. Of course, Uncle Yap has his own theory about why the headline was changed but I don’t think his conspiracy theory analysis is correct. It seems more likely to me that the night editor was sleeping when he approved the headline for print. The problem with the first headline wasn’t exactly the issue of Gopalan Nair being an American citizen but rather, the problem was the original headline was factually wrong. Gopalan Nair hasn’t been convicted and jailed. He is merely in police custody as the police conduct their investigations. It just seems to me that whoever wrote the story did not do a proper fact check or confused being in police custody with jailing. Maybe in Singapore, many lines are blurred and people both assume and conflate many things. I remember some time back, a police officer got confused between a political party and a government, saying that both are the same. I don’t have the physical copy of the second version, though. I would like to see if the later edition had an erratum somewhere in the paper. I can accept honest mistakes but if Today sneakily changed the headline without an erratum, that’s highly unprofessional. The PDF version of the later version is available on the website of the Today newspaper but I did not see the erratum in that version and that is seriously disturbing. Also, I think Gopalan Nair can sue Today for defamation. He has not been convicted and jailed but the headline stated that he has been jailed. I think the editors at Today should issue an erratum to mitigate the possibility of a defamation lawsuit. Barking up the wrong tree on FDW legislation? This entry was first published in Singapore Angle Perspectives last week and I’m reproducing it on my own blog for future reference. Barking up the wrong tree on FDW legislation? The Ministry of Manpower has once again refused calls for a law making it mandatory for employers to give their foreign domestic workers (FDWs) a day off every month and the refusal has led to some fairly negative reports and commentaries (see here and here). According to a Channel News Asia report, acting Minister of Manpower Gan Kim Yong said accredited employment agencies are required to use a standard contract and that the contract already stipulates the number of rest days the employer is obliged to give every month (note: the range is 1 to 4 days), and if the employer wishes to engage the service of the domestic worker on their rest days, the employer has to compensate the domestic worker. Curious about the terms of contract between an employer and a foreign domestic worker, I went to Case Trust website and dug up the employment contract and the explanatory notes (all are in MS-Word format). After reading the contract, I must say Gan does have a good point. The standard contract drafted up by CASE is actually pretty comprehensive and detailed. It even specifies the nature and scope of jobs that the domestic worker should perform. If the domestic worker is not agreeable to the scope and nature of the job required by a potential employer, she can refuse to sign the contract, assuming there is no undue pressure from the agency. And the contract, when signed, makes it compulsory for the employer to provide for the upkeep of the domestic worker at all times. Even if the employer decides to terminate the contract prematurely, upkeep has to be maintained until the worker either goes home or finds another employer. And, in the agreement between employer and agency, the employer has to agree not to obstruct the re-employment of the domestic worker in the event of termination. The only reason as far as I can see for support of legislation mandating a rest day for foreign domestic workers is that such a law, if passed, will apply across the board, whether it’s a Case Trust accredited or non-accredited employment agency. The only concern is that foreign domestic workers working under non-Case Trust accredited agencies might be shortchanged by both agency and employer. If that is the case, then proponents of legislating mandatory rest day for foreign domestic workers are barking up the wrong tree. They should really be calling for legislation making accreditation compulsory, i.e. licensing. The problem would be solved if only licensed employment agencies that adhere to the kind of standards set by Case are allowed to operate. Accreditation in itself is voluntary and has little bite unless either majority of employment agencies are accredited or employers mostly shun non-accredited agencies. However, one can still argue that even though there is a legal contract, the domestic worker can still receive the short end of the stick because some of them are not well-versed enough in the English language to understand their rights under the contract. A translated equivalent of the contract in the worker’s native language in the same signed contract will resolve this issue. I think the Case Trust accreditation scheme for employment agencies is certainly the right way to go. The only chink in the armour is that accreditation is not compulsory. If there is a way to make accreditation compulsory, then it might be unnecessary for a legislation mandating compulsory rest days for FDWs. Comment on Racism in Singapore: The sequel by cockapalooza Singapore is the most racist country that I’ve ever visited. JEEEZE!!! I can’t believe it!! However when the majority of the Singaporean chinks reside outside of Singapore, they scream racial discrimination. Learn to speak English dumb ass Singaporeans!! Comment on Survey Participants Needed by Aaron Ng Chronicler, Let me explain in plain language why I say you know nuts about about what you are talking about. Firstly, Likert is a scale, not a method or analysis. The method is a survey. Likert is merely one of the ways to measure an ordinal variable. As for analysis, you take the data and run it through correlation analysis, regression analysis or whatever other analysis suitable for answering your research questions. Secondly, even if you have 1000 responses, the results are meaningless if the sampling is not properly done. It’s not about mathematics. Statistically, 1000 responses is an excellent number of responses but if all 1,000 responses come from members of the brotherhood, the results are not generalisable to the population. It is only generalisable to members of the brotherhood. The results of statistical analysis are meaningless if the sampling is flawed. In anycase, based on the intent of the study, it appears that the research design isn’t meant to be generalisable so it really doesn’t matter if the brotherhood boycotts the survey or not. That being the case, it doesn’t matter if it is 50, 500 or 5,000 responses. I suggest that you read up on statistics for social science before you challenge me next time. Statistics for mathematics and statistics for social sciences are not quite the same. Comment on Survey Participants Needed by Aaron Ng Harphoon, Thanks for weighing in. The grievances voiced by Chronicler are valid and I will take up the topic in a later entry for discussion. It seems to me that the brotherhood is not a monolithic group and it probably complicates matters that there are self-proclaimed brotherhood members but I do hope the actions of Chronicler is a mere aberration. I have great respect for both you and Darkness for the both of you are very reasonable and I hope I can say the same for the rest of the brotherhood members. Comment on Survey Participants Needed by Harphoon The boycott recommended by the chronicler will have to stand on both counts. Let me explain to all of you why? Even activist such as Yawning Bread cannot deny, this whole idea of advocating a community moderator must at least be seen to be consistent. If you note very carefully, he delights in taking issue with what our govt does and doesn’t do. However, when it comes to issues directly on his door step i.e the issues which we have raised, he is adamant and even refuses to acknowledge them. We can only draw a few conclusions from this. He is either not interested. Or he doesn’t have the inclination to indulge in these matters. In both cases, this makes a very poor case for someone who proposes to occupy the high ground as a moral advocate. One cannot be in a pick and choose what is morally consistent, yet aspire to occupy a moral high ground. I just call this hippocrisy. He is a hopeless case for even the gay movement or for that matter any movement! The boycott recommended by the chronicler will have to stand under my authority. I will support it full heartedly. However, I expect the chronicler to issue an official apology to Darkness ( I cannot understand why he was purposely single out by the guild, in their vile reference: on 30 May 2008 at 6:16 pm – There is no excuse for this! Do you hear me!). I also want the guild federation to issue out an official apology to our Malaysian friends! Harphoon. Comment on What does it take for a Singaporean minister to be sacked? by Wondering in the criminal world, the bigger the crime, the bigger the pay out and the smaller the crime, the smaller the pay out. what kind of world this will be under the reign of capitalists in another few decades??we have to wait and see. by then, it maybe too late. Comment on Survey Participants Needed by Harphoon The questions that have been raised are serious. They will not simply go away. Neither will it cut any ice even if someone who claims to be an asst prof in some tin pot university chooses NOT to acknowledge it. Life is not so simple. These questions and their rammifications are much bigger that even him and all of us put together multiplied by a couple of thousand times. Darkness did what was required of a honest man who believes in something with all his heart, no more or less. “There is a time to make things happen and a time to let things happen.” Darkness 2008 Harphoon Comment on Survey Participants Needed by Harphoon Chronicler, Perhaps its best, if you take a break. I understand. Many of us are down hearted. Both writers and readers, but we must be mindful who we direct our anger towards. As despite our very best attempts to connect, it seems the G-15 are only content not to read, not to hear and even not to acknowledge our concerns. They believe it is their right to do so. I have no comment. My feel Chronicler is this; Darkness has invested a lot of time, energy and thoughtware to connect with the intellectuals in blogoland; he has reached out and posed many questions which will not simply go away; neither can they be just pushed to one side. The matters he has raised in the Phi Beta Kapa interview are jugular to the whole proposition of mooting the idea of the community moderator. However, when you write the things you do here and elsewhere Chronicler – what are you trying to accomplish? I have even heard, you have threatened the Malaysians!!!!!!!! Now you are picking fights with Aaron!!!!!!! Have you ever asked yourself; what will the thinking people make from all this rubbish you are spouting? Have you lost your brain? What are you trying to do, to all the hard work Darkness has invested in this whole matter? Are you adding or taking away value? You must think! Perhaps, you would do well to take Darkness cue and to simply walk away and never ever look back. Most of us have already left. He knew. He realized. He has true. Only last night, we rode together in East Coast. We spoke about many things Chronicler, the past, present and future, but never once did we touch on this topic of the internet – it’s over my friend. I realized this when he wrote this. He just got on his bike and rode away. This is the way wise people deal with unreasonable people. They state their case and they walk away. http://intelligentsingaporean.wordpress.com/2006/09/21/why-i-would-like-to-leave/#comment-33897 Bury your anger and come with us. Harphoon. PS: I am very sorry Aaron. We shall not disrupt your site any longer. Comment on Survey Participants Needed by chronicler “Anyway, from the standpoint of academic research, based on her sampling method, it is irrelevant as to whether the brotherhood people boycott the survey or not. It doesn’t affect the end result since it’s not random sampling anyway. And do you even know what you are talking about when you say for a Likert analysis u need X number before it can be seriously considered?” You are the one who do not know what you are talking abt. You stop talking rubbish and go and check with the faculty of mathematics. Go! Pay close attention to question 6 to 12! You are the one who do not know what you are talking abt! No cooperation! As for this: http://bleongcw.typepad.com/simple_is_the_reason_of_m/2008/05/seminar-on-inte.html Boycott lah! No cooperation! Comment on Survey Participants Needed by Aaron Ng Stop getting so full of yourself. What she wants to write in the annex is her business. Who are you to dictate what she is to write? Anyway, from the standpoint of academic research, based on her sampling method, it is irrelevant as to whether the brotherhood people boycott the survey or not. It doesn’t affect the end result since it’s not random sampling anyway. And do you even know what you are talking about when you say for a Likert analysis u need X number before it can be seriously considered? From that statement alone I can tell you know nuts about sampling and generalisability of results so quit babbling. The more you babble, the more you look like a noob, even though you have a valid case. The wise man knows when to speak and when not to. If you have a problem with The Online Citizen or Bernard Leong, go find them and deal with them. Stop harassing other innocent people. Comment on The States Times versus IHT by Ned Stark Erm, under the law of defamation, the intended effect of the words is irrelevant in construing whether they are defamatory. The Judge uses a hypothetical construct, called the reasonable man, to determine whether the statement is defamatory; namely whether the statement would lower the standing of the victim in the eyes of a reasonable person. This appears to be a rather easy threshhold to cross; see the previous case where the statement “Where is the money” was held to be defamatory. One defence to defamation is fair comment Whether the statement is an opinion is relevant to the defence of fair comment. However to rely on the defence there must be some facts to support the statement. Needless to say it is rather difficult to rely on such a defence. The States Times versus IHT Our top local English newspaper, the Straits Times, has sometimes been derisively called the States Times, and this observation is not for no good reason. Let’s compare some newspaper reports, two from the Straits Times (Story 1 and Story 2) and the other from International Herald Tribune, about the recent court hearing involving MM Lee and Chee Soon Juan. The Straits Times stories were published on 27th May and when I read them that day, the first thing that struck my mind was both stories were all coming from the perspective of MM Lee. It was all about the case that MM Lee made against Chee Soon Juan and there was nothing about Chee’s case against MM Lee. I think any educated person will be able to see these two stories are not journalistic writing. These two stories could have well been published in the PAP’s website or newsletter and not look out of place. Let’s look at the piece by IHT. To be honest, I do think the IHT piece is a wee bit biased against MM Lee but the journalist managed to contain the bias quite well and presented both sides of the story, unlike the two pieces from the Straits Times which were so obviously biased in favour of MM Lee. The IHT piece had quotes from both sides, although there were some unnecessary interpretations, such as the following paragraph: Lee expressed what seemed an extraordinary sense of vulnerability, even to the words of a lone critic, while his antagonist described a compulsion - even a mission - to challenge power at any cost. The journalist was very smart in making the negative observation, though. To deny MM Lee any possibility of a defamation lawsuit (IHT is most certainly most familiar with defamation threats from MM Lee), he deliberately added the word “seemed”. This one word might seem to be rather insignificant but those writing online can do well to learn from the IHT journalist and use words or phrases such as “seemed”, “appeared”, “I think that…”, “It is my opinion that…” etc. When using such words and/or phrases, it is obvious to a reader that the sentence is a statement of opinion and not fact. I am no expert on defamation but my understanding is that opinions are accepted to be inherently flawed and one cannot be successfully sued for defamation if it is clear that one is expressing an opinion and not a statement of fact. Of course, there are many other intricacies involved in determining whether someone has indeed defamed another but if you know how to write cleverly, couching negative observations as an opinion does help reduce the chances of being sued for libel. I must say I enjoyed the IHT piece a lot more than the two Straits Times pieces. I think it does more justice to Chee Soon Juan. You may say that I’m biased but I do think the IHT piece is real journalism. As for the two Straits Times pieces, you can decide for yourself what labels you want to place on them. What does it take for a Singaporean minister to be sacked? I’m not a history expert but from my limited knowledge of Singapore’s political history, there are a couple of precedents. The first way to get sacked is to engage in corrupt practices. Teh Cheang Wan, former Minister of National Development is an example, although he was never formally charged and sacked because he committed suicide before any proceedings could be brought against him. The second way is to be an alcoholic. Of course, the ex-president Devan Nair was not a minister and neither was he sacked from his presidency but apparently, he resigned from his position as Singapore’s President to get treatment for alcoholism. So, as long as you don’t take bribes and you don’t drink alcohol excessively, as a minister (or any other high ranking public official) in Singapore, you will never lose your million dollar job. I wish I had such a diamond rice bowl. Is there a Dummies’ Guide to becoming a minister in Singapore? I need one. Cyberspace politics: who cares? I just read Ephraim Loy’s comment on the PAP becoming the “opposition” in the online space, i.e. the PAP is in the minority when it comes to political discussions online. And Ephraim worries for the PAP in terms of elections performance during the next GE. In all honesty, I don’t think that the PAP really bothers about political discussions in cyberspace. The reason is simple. The vast majority of netizens engage in anonymous postings. It’s actually not all that hard to make a list of people who blog with their real identities. Anonymous chatter on cyberspace isn’t much of an immediate threat at all. Ephraim points to the recent Malaysian general elections to make the case that the online political space should be taken seriously. Well, the online political space will be taken seriously by the PAP if a Singaporean blogger actually contests a seat in the coming general elections. Unless the political cyberspace proves capable of causing the loss of real political power symbolised by the losing of parliamentary seats, why would the PAP care? That being said, are there bloggers who are willing to stand up and contest in a general election? I don’t see any, at least not now. I personally have no interest now, and it will probably remain so over the next 5-6 years because I want to finish grad school. Even after that, I am not too sure if I will still be blogging, much less contest an election. However, the fears voiced by Ephraim isn’t invalid. It’s just that he’s worrying about it too early. I doubt the local political cyberspace will have much of an effect on the overall voter pattern in the next 1-2 GEs. After that, I think there’s a chance that the PAP might suffer what Barisan Nasional suffered this year because the numbers of the “Youtube/Facebook/Blogger” generation would be a substantial proportion of the electorate. The problem for the PAP, if any, is not a short term one but a long term one. Of course, there will only be a problem if there are enough good alternatives to choose from. Some of the alternative candidates in the last GE were seriously lacking and I have sympathies for Yaw Shin Leong who got needlessly flamed for choosing the better candidate. For now, the gahmen can afford to ignore cyberspace. Whether that is a wise decision for Lee Hsien Loong’s successor is open debate. Loosen up a little, PAP Finally, I have time to actually sit down and put my thoughts into writing again. The end of semester hell has passed, at least for now. The twin stories of the World Bank managing director calling for loosening up of restrictions in Singapore and the seizure of a film during a private screening by the SDP caught my attention. I’ve always favoured less restrictions, particularly with regards to speech. Sure, giving complete freedom of speech may result in lots of irresponsible talk but well, as the Chinese saying goes, genuine gold does not fear fire. The truth will eventually surface. Those who repeatedly spout nonsense and lies will eventually end up like the boy who cried wolf; people will not take them seriously. This is why I don’t understand why the MDA has to step in to seize the film that was shown during SDP’s screening at Excelsior Hotel. Sure, the film is probably unkind to our founding prime minister but that’s life. There will be people who love you to bits and there will be people who hate you to the core. By attempting to prevent people from saying unkind things about you, I think it sends off a signal of insecurity. Despite his flaws, I think Lee Kuan Yew has done alot for Singapore and no one can take that away from him. I really think he should let the nay-sayers do that they want and let people judge for themselves what is the truth. Sure, people might be dissatisfied with Lee Kuan Yew (or the PAP for that matter) in one way or another but that’s normal. You cannot please everyone. I think Singapore should adopt a light touch approach not only to Internet regulation but to the entire media landscape. I think the PAP will gain alot more respect that way. Clamping down on words that are not music to the ear gives off a whole host of negative signals. I believe that young and educated Singaporeans are leaning towards the left and to court these young voters, there’s a need to loosen up. I disagree with many of the methods employed the SDP but the acting of seizing a film screened for a small group of people isn’t going to make me like the PAP. The Worker’s Party suddenly seem like a nice in-between. Survey Participants Needed No, I am not doing a survey but rather, someone contacted me and requested help in getting survey participants. If you are kind enough to assist, please help her out. The details of the survey are as follows: A NTU Masters student is conducting an Internet survey on “Internet Users’ Perceptions of Socio-Political Blog Credibility in Singapore”. The survey comprises of 19 questions and will take approximately 10 minutes to complete. This survey will run throughout May 2008 and respondents stand a chance of winning $200 cash. If interested, please click here.