Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
A real grassroots initiative by bloggers
I just read the online media release of a proposal by a group of 15 bloggers recommending sweeping changes to the way the Internet is regulated. The media release can be found on The Online Citizen.
I’m not part of the group (I am going to dub them G15 from now), although I was aware of the initiative. I commend the G15 for investing their personal time and effort into putting together the document. It looks like it’s going to be a great piece of work, although I don’t think that the recommendations will offer anything groundbreaking but rather, the recommendations are likely to sum up all the key thoughts and arguments in the Singaporean socio-political blogosphere on Internet regulation.
The next step is, of course, so what? Can we truly expect the government to implement most of the proposals? Wearing my pragmatic hat, I would imagine that the government will, at most, acknowledge the paper but say that it is too early to implement these proposals. Of course, this is a vast improvement compared to the past. If this initiative happened 30-40 years ago, the G15 would have to do prison break, Mas Selamat style. 
While I don’t think there’s much chance of a major shift in policy as a result of the document, I do think that it would help bolster the G15′s case if the proposal is endorsed by as many netizens as possible. As it stands now, if I were the government, I would contend that the G15 is hardly representative of the online population and then proceed to ignore it. It would be much harder to question the legitimacy of the proposal if there were some 50,000 to 100,000 Singaporean netizens endorsing it.
Of course, it is going to be difficult to even get 1,000 netizens to endorse the proposal, let alone 100,000. I think that majority of the blogs in Singapore fall into the personal journaling category and these folks, having little opportunities to run afoul of any regulations, are unlikely to lend their support to the proposal. However, I think every single endorsement counts. I will read the full proposal when it is released and it is very likely that I will endorse that proposal.
The heartening thing about this proposal is that it is a genuine grassroots initiative and not the result of some committee mandated by the government. Of course, there are going to be some people who are sore at not being “invited” to give their opinions and they will claim that the G15 is an elitist group. In fact, reading the comments thread on the media release on The Online Citizen, it looks like these folks are going to start questioning the legitimacy of the proposal.
To these folks, please, get out of my elite uncaring face. Stop being so damn full of yourselves.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 19/04/2008 at 9:30 am, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 2 years ago
Just to recall a bit of how the group came together to set the record straight before it gets bent, there was never any question of people being invited or not invited to join the group.
There was an open call put out in late November 2007 for bloggers to come to a meeting in December. That open call was carried for a few weeks in The Online Citizen and Yawning Bread and echoed, I believe in a few other blogs. People came on their own volition, not on invitation. We had no idea who would show up and who wouldn’t, but in the end a manageable number did – manageable in the sense that it was not too small to be without substance, nor too big to be unwieldy.
The process of forming the group was highly democratic and as you will see in the final document to be released soon, even the way the proposals are presented is also highly democratic.
about 2 years ago
Alex,
I wasn’t about to imply that there was an invitation but rather, I was responding to some comments I see on TOC that smacks of demanding an “invitation”, which is ridiculous.
You should have noticed that the word invite in my original entry was enclosed with quotation marks to signify that there was no actual invitation. But of course, some people with overly big egos appear to think otherwise, demanding a reason as to why they were not “consulted”.
Thanks for the clarification, though. It’s always good to set the record straight.
about 2 years ago
—-Darkness wrote this bfr he went cycling, its on a communicator so there are many spelling mistakes / I think he has a right to his view and you should not be so quick to call him a egoist without first bothering to understand his thoughts on the matter. As for Alex Au, we dont agree with him / Chronicler————
WHEN GOOD IS NOT SO GOOD – A STUDY IN CONSULTATIVE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
Good Afternoon my friends,
As you know by now http://aaron-ng.info/blog/a-real-grassroots-initiative-by-bloggers.html, a ‘few’ bloggers decided to met up in long john silver and after polishing off their fish fingers they have decided to propose something monumentally important to our govt – indeed this is laudable, truly they have my utmost respect and admiration and I have no doubt they genuinely have your interest and mine at heart. Really, I am not trying to be sarcastic here.
However, before we uncork the Champagne lets put on our thinking caps for one moment and ask ourselves – who are these people actually representing? Before we go down this road, let’s just ask ourselves what’s the composition of blogosphere? Did you know that nearly 93.4% of the make of blogosphere comprises of anon bloggers, posters and probably readers / that out of the content produced based on word count alone / anonymous posters account for nearly 85-88.3% of what typically features in blogosphere on a 12 day cycle / and this figure appears to be growing at a rate of nearly 12.4% per 12 day cycle.
So one more time please. Who are they actually representing? Now when we speak of specific rights no one can deny everyone is entitled to the right to privacy. You can even say it’s an elemental right, but tell me why weren’t the anon statistical significant in this case even given an opportunity to participate in this proposal? I want you all to think about this very carefully, not only the anon bloggers, but also those who may also blog openly, as what we are talking about here, isn’t really about the issue of whether these blogger are justified, right or wrong or even whether they are true to the spirit of blogging; we are talking here about something very fundamental that goes into the heart of the issue of what it means to participate in an all inclusive process; the right to be consulted, the right to be informed and a corollary of this even includes, the right to even participate meaningfully in this process. All of you need to ask yourself why wasn’t this proposal even discussed in a public forum in the internet? Why didn’t these bloggers who were responsible for crafting this proposal to our government, see the need to consult you or me? Tell me, who is actually representing the statistical significant community of 93.4%?
Now this is the part where I will share with you what should have been done, this proposal should have be layed out pasar malam style before everyone in and outside blogosphere – whether you choose to be engaged or switched off is another matter, but that’s the gold standard of what it takes to be a real consultative trilogue between named bloggers, anon bloggers and govt. This way there would be ample provision and scope for all interest and views to be taken on board. This is where, you the perceptive reader need to ask yourself why wasn’t this done? Now at this point, you need to recruit a sense of urgency here, if you aspire to understand my point that is; what we are talking about here is a very fundamental right; so why wasn’t there any provision for either you or me to even get involved? Think about it.
Let’s move on the next point; what are these people really trying to accomplish? I am not asking you what is their motivation? That’s given. I am told they want a better tomorrow for all bloggers, but how are they working towards the realization of that goal? Can that be practically accomplished given the way they are going about it? Again I am not asking you whether they’re a valiant lot or whether all of them should be conferred the pour le merit, as I said earlier, I understand they are trying to work towards a better tomorrow; I am simply asking an operational question; how sensible is their approach? Will it manage to deliver a new dawn for all of us? Again this turns on how inclusive the process is? Does it successfully harmonize the respective goals, roles and vision of all the stake holders? Or are the views on representative of a handful of bloggers. Now I have to be very clear here; whatever instrument is used to solicit common ground, it must also be able to solicit a high level of understanding with MICA. It cannot just turn on a few hallowed ideas of a few people who are making films only because they want to run foul of the censorship laws (as strange as that may be the reason to make films in Singapore, there are actually people who are driven by such motivations) or even the views of a few parochial few who have a gender crusade – we are not talking about morality, equity or even fairness here as much as dwelling on the practical question of how intelligent and reasonable people go about the business of craving out common ground. Again you, the perceptive reader needs to weight these competing claims.
You see I don’t believe the government sees the internet differently from us – and there is one compelling reason why I believe that to the true; its really very simple, they simply can’t afford too; if they don’t manage to make it turn on its linchpin, its bad for business. So I am not one of those who readily subscribe to the belief, they are out to retard intellectualism, innovation or creativity here; as not only does it make lousy case from a nation building but it simply sets into motion the extinction event for any society who aspires to stake a claim in this globalised age stand point; no one can make a meal out the case to kill and cook the goose that lays the golden egg – not in this age at least, the net in my view qualifies eminently to be considered a protected species, hence the light touch policy – my feel is where there might be a problem is one that afflicts every oligarchy; that’s to say it conceivable even within a ministry and the broader sphere of the party political machinery; they are radicals as they might exist intelligent and stupid people, moderates and radicals etc this dichotomy can be extended even further to include even progressives and regressive thinkers; why is this observation important? What bearing does it have on our discussion?
You see my dear friends, if a new dawn in the internet is to purchased, then it will have to emerge directly from the class of these moderates, progressives and far sighted thinkers; it stands the test of reason as it can never emerge from the ranks of the parochial, insular and illiberal minded; this hardly requires any elaboration; when we consider how middle aged spinsters who still stay with their mummies beyond the age of emancipation regularly spout unmitigated cat puking diatribe whenever they speak on subjects concerning the collective good; but bear in mind these progressives, moderates and far thinking people cant do it all alone: it conceivable, if we bloggers argue no end for freedom to regularly inure what we regularly write with more panache and élan, then by the same token the same the latitude of widget space and flexibility to permit experimentation with incremental improvements must also feature with these technocrats who regularly policy plan and strategize. Understand this, I am not excusing the numerous of instances of ineptitude and inadvertence and even lack of creative imagination when they fail to deliver the goods of higher freedom in the net or elsewhere; only one cannot put the horse before the cart and expect to make any meaningful progress.
Neither can these enlightened bloggers expect to crave out anything resembling common ground, if all they do is to nurse the ideal as to what they consider to be fair or unfair, just or unjust, constitutional or unconstitutional and yet not appreciate the full sweep of the constraints which usually confront these policy planners – we would of course like to delude ourselves, these policy makers have all the answers readily at hand. Nothing can be further from the truth. If the truth be known, they’re have data streaming right out of every orifice, but they don’t have the means to make sense of it – like this site all they have is one IP, what happens in between is a just smoke and mirrors and they are none the wiser, trust me. So we need to give them free play, but how might codifying our rights into laws help the case? Again you have to think hard about this, as they are practical issues here.
I understand when some of you wax lyrical and proclaim prima donna style, in a world where it behooves everyone to know what is good and bad; we could just as well entrust ours intellect with the business of picking out the good from the bad like cherries and simply declaring, “here it is! Take it or leave it!” That’s naïve and as it provisions no basis to even crave common ground. You see how we always come back to this issue, time and again?
Yet this may be what these bloggers have done, theirs is not an attempt to fashion a better tomorrow as much as it remains a declaration of false faith, which makes free use of certain excesses committed by the radicals and regressive by omitting, bending, exaggerating, inventing and embellishing the truth in the name of the greater good; fact remains no such universal good or right ever existed and these bloggers might as well be ruminating over the affairs of some country in fairytale land – in truth, by any practical interpretation of the word, good has to be an elastic term; and what does this mean in this specific context? It means your good may not be my good or even the good that seeks to solicit deep understanding with the broader collective good. And if we can entertain that even the simple good as an idea, a school of thought or even a philosophy is capable of harboring a multitude of meanings depending on where we choose to look at it; then where may I ask is the profit in codifying the means of interpreting even this idea into black letter law? How does this make the life of the moderates within any oligarchy easier? Would that idea inure their acts and omissions with a higher degree of flexibility? Or would it calcify the whole idea of initiatives so completely leaving the whole idea of progress impossible?
Let me press my final point home. Do these bloggers who claim to represent us all even understand what is; the broader implications when one codifies practices into the black letter law? Yes, I am not doubting for one moment it may even prove amenable to clarify your position and mine against the legal accounts, but what actually happens when something is codified? Where does that power to decide upon this or that eventually shift too? How it continue to reside within the ranks of those who may be best position to make those sort of decisions? Or is it relocated to another governing body, where it could be said, they neither have the skill or imagination to decide beyond the dictionary meaning of words imposed upon them by the discipline of black letter law?
What would all this mean for all of us? I am reserving comment for the moment as I don’t want to be accused of unduly influencing any of you on such a matter of such urgency, but to the perceptive reader note this; someone here wrote this proposal makes the charge of the light brigade look like a sensible military enterprise; you all need to consider whether that’s really an apt summary of the situation. Whatever your decision one thing remains patently certain to me, as even those within my ranks fail to understand where I am coming from, we shall be none the wiser my friends, if all the decision concerning this matter resides in only the hands of a few men who claim to see the world clearer than everyone else.
Do have a pleasant weekend. Now you must all excuse me, I need to gear up to touch base with a few monkeys underneath a tree to teach them how to pick coconuts.
Darkness 2008
There is a good article / interview related to this post / check it out; here
http://singaporedaily.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/daily-sg-18-apr-2008/#comment-1786
END
The Brotherhood Press Release 2008
about 2 years ago
We have been trying to shut him up for 5 years maybe you and your friends will have more luck
Send my warmest regards and greetings to your new wife and family. We wish you good health, prosperity and happy thoughts.
The Chronicler
about 2 years ago
Darkness has a good point there.
Everyone in the blogosphere, especially the majority, who are anonymously putting up comments and posts, should be shown the full details of the proposal first for discussion and contribution.
I, as one of the anonymous bloggers, readers and commenters, would also want to put in my two cents before the final draft is completed.
Is such a request unacceptable?
about 2 years ago
Aaron Ng
I believe there may be many unexplored issue here. I can’t speak for other anon bloggers or even those who may decide to post on an anon basis.
However, in my case the right to privacy as the gentlemen mentioned is something which has allowed me to speak up on issues which i feel strongly for and against. This would not have been possible for a variety of reasons, if I had to declare my identity.
Firstly, where I work, the people are very traditional and square minded, blogging is still considered a time sapping and unproductive activity for the idle and idolent.
Secondly, even if I have the freedom to do so in my work setting, its very unlikely that I will blog openly, as by nature, I am very shy reserved and also somewhat insecure about my looks.
Thridly, I am not based in Singapore, but in HK, this however does not mean my heart is not tied to home.
Besides I prefer to be in the background most of the time. My mum says thats my nature. However, this does not mean, I dont have a POV that I dont want others to hear me out or dont wish to contribute. It just means, I value my own space and I need time to myself to work things through before it comes out. We are all made differently Aaron, not everyone is an extrovert or likes to be an open book.
How do we even expect to embrace diversity as a nation and people, if we cannot even see the greys, blues and cobalt in the clouds?
Anon and proud of it.
about 2 years ago
“A real grassroots initiative by bloggers.” And the wise stranger who travelled from the East asked, how tall might the grass be? and how deep might the roots sink in? To which none could answer and so one by one the crowd dispersed.
Tales of the Unexpected
about 2 years ago
Aaron,
I know you are a prominent blogger Mr Ng, as our press has frequently sought out your comments and you have even been featured on numerous occasions concerning a range of topics. I can very well see how that might give you the impression, your have every right to believe you can be pungent and even highly suggestive to the bp people. Or maybe you can clarify for us all who you are referring too specifically? Though what you have said and I quote, “To these folks, please, get out of my elite uncaring face. Stop being so damn full of yourselves” goes too far in my opinion as not ony does it contain leaps and elisions of thoughts but it gives one the impression we dealing with people who dont have a case. We are not. I have read through it carefully 6 times to make sure. Ideally, this matter should have been handled by the P-65 team or even the blogger committee themselves. However, all we can hope to see is their elegant mufflement to such issues which touch on real interest and concerns. I wonder Mr Ng, if they really take your jaunty comments seriously and get out of your and my elite uncaring face, will you, I wonder step in and speak for us anon bloggers, posters and readers?
about 2 years ago
You really want to know why you people can never make any meaningful progress? Based on what little I have seen here and elsewhere in Asia what you people regularly do so well is inadvertently recreate the very world that you aspire to change and transform in the place that you frevently hope to inspire meaningful change and transformation. Thats the irony of it all, nothing will happen after these, we saw it with the NLB fiasco my friend Valentine Cawley highlighted. We also it in numerous other instances. Life as we all know it will just go on as usual.
about 2 years ago
Good Afternoon all,
Understand this clearly! We are not here to hold those to account in the way a lynching mob goes around demanding wrong’s to be righted! Do I make myself clear? If any of you want to do that, then please go join the free Tibet movement. I believe they are even giving out free T shirts, mugs and gas masks – the last thing we need now is to form a zombie army. That’s no good, it cannot do the job. Do you all hear me? It just doesn’t come around. The way I see it, this matter is solely between me and Aaron and in this case, I exercise my prerogative to read it NOT as a personal slight on my character, but rather as an opinion formed based on incomplete information. So the matter is cut and dried, its game over, it is finished and we move on to bigger and more important things, that is how smart people manage opportunities, they don’t have time to wallow nursing their grudges – besides my judgment of the situation tells me we may need every single thinking blogger, if we are to remain effective and this includes the likes of Aaron. So lets remain calm my friends. My reading is its still early days as the first volleys of arrows have not even begun to rain down, so this is not the time to go around behaving like Mr Brown pocket battleship activist, as I said, we don’t need a zombie army – that simply doesnt come around. For all of you who are under a spell, this is just a good opportunity to post all sort of rubbish in support of BP, please go away and find somewhere quiet to die – nothing can be further from the case. This is a game of chess, a game that demands nothing less than cerebral fitness if we are to win, so be under no illusion there is really no substitute for sound judgment – so conserve your energy and read up on the issues, so that you may be better prepared to make an informed decision to craft a killer proposal – as for me, I have said what I wanted to say in my long comatose inducing post, when the time comes trust me, we will all be counted. Meanwhile we must all run deep and silent. I trust all of you will consider my words before deciding to post here in future.
Darkness 2008
PS: you know what I do when I want to chill – I go down to this joint in Project Entropia, its in a seedy part of town, but theres a nice drink hole there called ‘the harem.’ Tip: just make sure you set your plasma gun to ‘kill’ – I have blown off a lot of heads there and they’re all probably hanging on the wall in the P-65 blog. Back to the point; the boss of the harem is run by this Moroccan who used to be a bounty hunter. You see there is really sparky 5 chili hot belly dancer who goes by the moniker Gillese – she actually based in Singapore! I was just wondering (this is a very long shot) does anyone happen to know her in the real world? I mean she looks super in the virtual and moves like quick silver etc, but the last thing, I want to do now is met up with someone in my fav food court and find out she is 2 metric ton serial murderer – you know what I mean? On that note chill.
about 2 years ago
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sNEqI31-wTI
Check out Giselle, give or take +/- 10% lah, she’s something like this when she does her snake dance, but you get my drift. Real artist lah.
Darkness 2008
about 2 years ago
Mr Ng is right.
I’ll just be repeating the facts here, when darkness 2008 (no less) said that “We weren’t even consulted.” any reasonable person, reading that sentence, will infer that the originator of the sentence had “expected” to be “consulted” (emphasis added). consulted. like a student going to the teacher for advice.
(this is the general part and not in reference to anybody, in case people take offence and want to “declare war”. it’s just my personal views please don’t “declare war” on me.)
it doesnt matter how knowledgeable, well-versed, eloquent or how long you’ve been blogging for. my personal belief is that no one owes you anything. to feel slighted that no one approached you for your advice, or listed ur name on a list of “prominent” bloggers is just plain arrogance. and childish. so you weren’t invited to the party. so what? life goes on. i am personally very gratified and humbled whenever anyone asks for my advice.
This expectation of respect and servitude seems too much like the arrogance from the MIW for me to stomach.
so Mr Ng is right, imo. having a point, and how you make it, is two different matter. i don’t think Mr Ng was being pungent or suggestive. i feel the same way as he does.
sure Darkness may have a point, about insufficient representation. but what about the call for bloggers to join to voice their concerns? if you saw the call out, and you couldnt be arsed to join, then don’t come and complain that you couldn’t get your 2 cents or $2 worth of views heard. because you had given up your chance.
as for his proposed method, i have my reservations. his kind of pasar malam style debate only works in small populations. that’s why individual democracy has evolved into representative democracy. you can leave it pasar malam style for 1 year and still people will complain they dint have the chance to voice their views. and you just need 1000 different suggestions and you’re swamped. where to begin? who’s gonna sort it? back to the same old problem. If darkness really believes in this method, by all means start this initiative. I’ll support it 100%. All this can only benefit singapore’s blogosphere
in summary? having a valid view is good. expecting people to consult you on your view is egoistic. join the initiative if you want. if you choose not to don’t complain. If you think it sucks and you have conviction in your own ideas, start your own initiative, and show you can do it better! all my opinion of course. please feel free to disagree, and don declare war on me please. lol.
oh by the way… i’m pretty new to this BHpress thing. who are these people? why do people seem to hold them in such high-regard? what have they done to deserve this respect or regard? not being a cock here, i really dunno. please, can someone tell me what they have done?
about 2 years ago
Looks like darkness and i posted at the same time, and i’m too stupid to figure out how to edit my comment, so i guess you can read and forget everything i said in the first 24 lines (can’t seem to break into paragraphs here lol.)
about 2 years ago
anon-scared-of-war,
I tell you what. This is what I am going to do. First I am going to go down and watch Gisselle prance around for 15 min bc my boss is out now. Then I am diving in for a short conference call where I have to pretend to be really engaged, after that I have full meeting, so again, I am going to put some tippex in my eye and paint black dots and cat nap again. Then on my kit-kat time on the mrt on the way home, I am going to whip out my communicator and put you into a nice little plastic bag. Hows that?
To be con’t
about 2 years ago
As far as I concerned, if anyone has dissenting views on the work of the G15, feel free to write your own document and send it to MICA, just at the G15 did. The G15 never said they represented the entire blogging community, so they need not consult anyone for that matter. I believe blogosphere is a democratic community where no one is denied a chance to speak. It’s a matter of whether you want to take the initiative to be heard, and taking the initiative to make yourself heard doesn’t mean demanding to be heard. As much as one has the right to speak, others have the right not to hear. Convince people to hear you with the strength of your arguments, not demands for consultation. I have full respect for Darkness and the brotherhood but in my opinion, I think they have stepped slightly out of line with respect to this issue.
about 2 years ago
Aaron,
Let me dive in directly. Question: Will this proposal affect ONLY 15 bloggers and exclude you, me and probably 10,000 other bloggers? Will the rest of us be exempted from its purview? (if the proposal goes through that is). Aaron it’s regrettable that I should be the one and not one of the 15 making these sort of basic clarifications on their behalf. However allow me assure you, logically it cannot be confined to only them and not us as well.
No govt on this planet, not even the imaginary council of the planet of the apes, is going to consider AMMENDING and REPEALING the enabling act just for the sake of 15 bloggers, unless they are some how related to Dan Browns Da Vinci royal blood line. Aaron, I think you need to appreciate the usage of these terms. They are very specific and unambiguous. They come with clear legal implications which not only define but also delineate roles, goals and sets the general scope of how they may or may not apply under a given set of conditions (I had lunch with Dotty and a few kind ladies who had the patience to sit me down on a baby chair and lecture me abt it) – you see, it doesn’t make any economic sense for any govt to just AMMEND and REPEAL laws for ONLY 15 bloggers, as the process of amending, repealing and harmonizing the laws will take millions of tax payers dollars and consume an inordinate amount of resources. Besides it would run counter to the whole idea of jurisprudence i.e there can only be one law that applies to all.
So lets be very clear here Aaron – this is not a matter of ‘oh 15 bloggers have decided to present a proposal to the govt and if it goes through then it will only apply to them and no one else, so we all shouldn’t be kaypoh and go and kachau them’ – no such thing Aaron, if that were really the case, I wouldn’t even bother to pick up the good fight. Why should I? I have better things to do with my time. Nothing will make me happier than to believe my world or yours will remain unchanged by all this (if this goes through to its illogical end) and I would probably accord it the same treatment as why organized criminals don’t usually bother about two drunks slugging it in the alleyway – it inconsequential – but in case (if it goes through and this is always a theoretical possibility, as there will always be stupid people in every oligarchy) it WILL affect ALL of us. Do you understand why we have to take equity in this process even if we don’t want to get involved?
I can recall reading abt what they were doing last December, but I and others were completely aghast when I heard what they had proposed only a few days ago.
I hope you understand Aaron.
Darkness 2008
about 2 years ago
Darkness,
1. If 15 is not enough, how many will be enough to represent you, me and probably 10,000 other bloggers? i doubt electing representatives will work on the internet. how do you organise an election? and, how do you get the consensus of 10,000 people?
2. would it not be better for volunteers (read: people who actually care) to come forward to put forth their views? in a place and time where no one leads, someone’s gotta! i think the bloggers come from all walks of life and are all responsible, reasonable people. I know some of them, and they command my respect. Why do you not think that these people cannot come up with decent proposals?
3. If you indeed object to the content, they’ve listed their key proposals here. with what points, are you dissatisfied with? (point 1 to 8, on TOC.)
4. If you agree with the content, but disagree with the method, then can you propose a better one? a method that will see all 10,000 bloggers being heard. or electing blogger representatives.
5. of course this is not gonna make the government repeal/amend any laws. they don’t pretend that it will! (read their cover letter, once again on TOC). It’s all about being heard, and letting the powers that be know that the laws are being scrutinized. and of course, offering key proposals that hopefully the government will take into account.
I hope you understand Darkness. and of course answer my few questions listed here, especially point 3 and 4.
Anon.
my 2.5cents worth.
p.s. wonders if html works here.
about 2 years ago
WHAT IS REALLY WRONG WITH THE G-15 BLOGGERS PROPOSAL?
[This is an unsolicited interview conducted with an anon interviewer in Aaron's Blog - the brotherhood press]
Q: Anon: 1. If 15 is not enough, how many will be enough to represent you, me and probably 10,000 other bloggers? i doubt electing representatives will work on the internet. how do you organise an election? and, how do you get the consensus of 10,000 people?
A: Darkness: let me begin by setting the record straight. I have the deep admiration and respect for these 15 bloggers. I respect any man who walks up to the plate, bc that takes deep spirited commitment and guts even if its for all the wrong reasons, providing its for a noble cause. And in this case I believe they are genuine, so we have to really give them all the 3 hip hips here. Where we part waves – is on the issue of methodology and approach.
Here you have understand this is not an issue abt bean counting – it’s not an issue about 15, 1,000 or even a statistical significant 1,000, 000. As it remains an issue that revolves around the notion of elemental rights – why is this so important? Because even if you happen to have a statistical majority on your side, this does not mean you have the mandate to do anything you want under the sun – this is where we have to appreciate the practical limits of democracy and the discipline it imposes on even ordinary bloggers who choose to represent all of us. While democracy may remain an effective anecdote against oppression, persecution and even harassment – what bears repeating is it too as a school of thought can facilitate a very insidious form of tyranny – one where the statistical significant hijacks the law and the means to further their own designs and nefarious ends at the expense of the statistical minority. This hardly requires any elaboration, the world has seen this before, the Jewish holocaust, slavery the denial of rights for women etc. I can really go on and on here, history is redolent with such instances of abuse in the name of the statistical significant. And so it behooves every netizen to understand that if we are to crave a better world in the internet, then we must never repeat the mistakes which we have committed in the name of the collective good, or the moral majority or even the Mickey Mouse club, but how do we accomplish this?
My feel is the founders of the American constitution gave us a very good road map and we should really take a closer look at it – these intellectuals did not say, if you have the statistical majority, you can go and paint the town red or burn down the white house in the greater glory of democracy – no, what they did was to enshrine what they believed to be constitutional and elemental rights of man by weaving it specifically into the text of the constitution so that even if the statistical majority wanted to hijack it, their efforts would be blunted and why did they do this? You need to ask yourself this, because this is the main plank of my argument why I feel the G15 bloggers have got it all wrong in the their approach. If you miss this point, you will not understand why I am going on and on about the mechanics and methodology – and everything will just cease to make any sense and its even likely you think, I am an irrational person – Why did they (the founding fathers) deliberately put the cookie jar on the high shelve? Away from the grubby hands of the executive, legislature and judiciary – because they knew only too well this was the best way to guarantee the rights of man and it is premised on the belief, we should never pursue actions with far and wide sweeping changes simply because its expedient, cost effective, economical or even pragmatic. Because in every oligarchy there will always be an idiot with a calculator who and ledger who always makes cost and benefit calculations – this simply means we need to take the high road instead of the short cut, because what we do today will serve as a precedent for our children, so we need to get it right the first time, we need to be mindful of the responsibility, that in my view is the discipline that leadership imposes upon everyone of those 15 bloggers – if they don’t know this, they should even be there! Taking the high road is not that usual if you think about it, that’s the reason why we have judges to preside over murder cases instead of a computer or an Ipod – do you see my point; democracy not only imposes responsibility, but it also demands from us the moral fortitude to keep to some time honor rules even if they are leceh (cumbersome). My feel is it’s simply foolhardy to ask the question, “how many will be enough to represent you, me and probably 10,000 other bloggers?” the fact of the matter remains pragmatic calculation can never take priority over the complexity of having to pay homage to the rights of man – if it means going around three times, so be it in this case, my feel is the statistical significant disregarded this dictum so completely with the anon bloggers, poster and readers as the mechanics which seeks to solicit understanding doesn’t even provision one morsel for anonymous to participate, then it’s a bit like asking a community of cripples to scale a flight of stairs if they want justice – here the very means doesn’t exclude them as it mocks the very idea that they can even seek it as a right – tell me who is arrogant, me or they? I don’t know whether it bothers you, but I for one will not be able to sleep very well ,if I just said, OK lah, I have legs, this doesn’t concern me, it really their problem and not mine, but really is this the sort of internet culture we want to have and leave to our children? If this is answered in the negative – then it is clear as day, we must take the high road, even if it is impractical, costly, inefficient, unrealistic and uneconomical, as that’s what it takes to really build a better tomorrow – is it such a wonder ppl who regular take short cuts fail to realize this? What I wonder is the price of doing otherwise? This is something all bloggers would do well to consider before they turn in for the night.
2. Q: Would it not be better for volunteers (read: people who actually care) to come forward to put forth their views? in a place and time where no one leads, someone’s gotta! i think the bloggers come from all walks of life and are all responsible, reasonable people. I know some of them, and they command my respect. Why do you not think that these people cannot come up with decent proposals?
A: Yes that would appear to be a sensible proposition, but on closer examination, I am reminded Durai started off as a volunteer, so did Adolf Hitler, Stalin and Idi Amin, they all started off as servants of the greater good believe it or not – what we need to understand here is that the very notion of power has the potential of modulating ones character for the worse, even the best of us are susceptible to this gravity of vices – that’s why the wise provision for good systems and inure it with good people – you cant put the horse bfr the cart and expect to make progress – the system and processes must always comes first and by this people must simply be reduced to custodians and guardians of the due process – to me this is non negotiable especially when you look at the Malaysian experience – if that imposes upon us the need to take the high road, then we simply must. In this particular case you have to really ask yourself why no provision was ever made to reach out to the statistical significant anon bloggers, posters and readers? IMO this is not only a travesty of justice but also of logic. If that is the price it takes to sustain and feed the idea of volunteerism, then I am willing to say, it just a lousy cost / trade off. I rather pay for it and get professionals to come in to do a job. I am certain the internet will provision for it, if not the our guilds will be more than willing to pay for it, but you have consider whether that is acceptable to the rest of the internet community – money will always remain derisive in my view.
3. QIf you indeed object to the content, they’ve listed their key proposals here. with what points, are you dissatisfied with? (point 1 to 8, on TOC.)
A: My concern is not with the substantive, as I do not believe it can be even considered seriously by any policy planner – this at least is what even our best strategist tells me at this early stage. They appear to me more concerned about the informal platform that has been discussed at length by Bernard Leong. You have to go and check out his post: http://bleongcw.typepad.com/simple_is_the_reason_of_m/2008/04/community-moder.html For some reason our strategist have tagged this as a ‘real and present’ threat, this is unusual, but I really need to sit underneath a coconut tree and discuss the specifics with them to understand it further – I regret to inform you, I don’t have the information to flesh this part out for the moment, but I assure you that I will be able to do so in a few more days. Do bear with us.
4.Q If you agree with the content, but disagree with the method, then can you propose a better one? a method that will see all 10,000 bloggers being heard. or electing blogger representatives.
A: Again you seem to be preoccupied with bean counting, pls refer to my reply to your question in (1)
5.Q: of course this is not gonna make the government repeal/amend any laws. they don’t pretend that it will! (read their cover letter, once again on TOC). It’s all about being heard, and letting the powers that be know that the laws are being scrutinized. and of course, offering key proposals that hopefully the government will take into account.
I hope you understand Darkness. and of course answer my few questions listed here, especially point 3 and 4.
A: “It’s all about being heard, and letting the powers that be know that the laws are being scrutinized” – I disagree vehemently even under the strongest possible terms allowable with your simplistic view of how events may unfold. Let me give you an analogy of how I really see this group of 15 and their proposal to our govt – it’s really like a pretty lithe convent girl driving around soliciting for church funds. Suddenly she takes a wrong turn. In a while she’s in a different world, it could just as well be downtown Kampala, Mogadishu or Baghdad – she naively steps out of her rental and walks into a watering hole to ask for directions and when she walks in, she sees a group of men a strung out in the bar counter…..you could just as well fill up the blanks yourself with a bit of imagination, but I guarantee you, they wouldn’t be playing doctor or can where can we find the rabbit who went down the hole?
The best case scenario, our govt will sent a few wax works to review it and say thank you very much, we will get back to you and file it under the X files and outsource it to both agent Molder and Scully since they’re task with the Mas Selamat case – worst case scenario in my view is some of this proposal will fall into the hands of some real savvy bad ass scholars – who may streamline and retrofit some of these proposals with their own hidden agenda, that IMO is where the real danger lies when one gets too close to govt and how do I know this? Because this is exactly what, we the brotherhood – who in his right mind would look a gift horse in the mouth and say, go break a leg?
Thank You.
Darkness 2008
[Anon / Darkness – Interview – The Brotherhood Press 2008]
Related post: http://ian.onthereddot.com/
about 2 years ago
I have only this to say; do not bargain until You have seen, inspect the good(s) and know its’ price!
about 2 years ago
*beeeeeep* sorry ah sir. i ran out of tape. wait ah i put new cassette. lol.
thanks for your extremely verbose arguement. at least i can feel that i understand you better now. having said that though, i must respectfully say that i still disagree.
ok sir, my (shorter) rebuttals.
1. I’m sorry if i came across as a bean counter, but that was the impression i got, reading ur reply to Mr Ng. you had seemed concerned that 15 bloggers views are going to affect the rest of blogosphere, am i correct? if so, your stance must have changed since i understand u better now.
i understand your concern about the need to protect and enshrine certain “constitutional” rights of bloggers, and you are afraid G15 acting on their own has contravened this. but may i once again remind u, the american constitution was drafted by those number of wise men. While they were representatives, i’m sure not everyone agreed with what was enshrined. furthermore, they had hundreds of years of democracy to build upon, and is itself a work of draftsmanship shaped by their experience of declaring independance. to distinguish our case, the blogosphere itself is in a state of infancy, and to attempt to draft a constitution right at the beginning is probably impossible. furthermore, you cannot protect the “rights” of the people until you know what the people want. or have suitable representatives who have been empowered to decide for the people. in this case, you don’t know, and you don’t have. furthermore, there is no “tyranny of majority” here, since the G15 are bound by whatever they submit. they are not the majority. keeping this point short, i shall sum up by saying that yes. you are right. some ideals must be protected. however, in our case, first you can’t ascertain these ideals yet . second, G15 has called for participants and input. furthermore, the door is not closed. in fact, the discussion has probably just begun. third, the proposals submitted are open for all to see. they are not acting behind our collective backs.
2. durai? stalin? hitler?? Ye gods!! Godwin’s law is proved!! how about mother teresa, gandhi, martin luther king? it doesn’t answer the question anyway. “Why do you not think that these people cannot come up with decent proposals?” anyway upon reading your first answer first sentence, i think you do agree that they CAN come up with decent proposals. so let’s move on. there’s no need to talk about power corrupts and absolute power and what not here… yet.
3. huh? what strategist? either way doesn’t matter whether you, or anyone else can criticize it or not. it’s good that it’s criticized anyway. tear it to shreds, if u will. the final product can only be a better one (one hopes anyway).
4. sorry for counting beans! so moving on from bean counting, how do you propose we protect those ideals stated in answer 1 and walk the high road? how about giving us some viable alternatives here? what do you mean by walking the high road? if what we are doing now is wrong, then what should have been done, or what should we being doing now, such that it’s right?
5. i don’t get ur arguement. by what i do get (correct me if i’m wrong.), you’re saying we shouldn submit proposals to the government because then they’ll twist it to their own ends? why if that’s the case then it’s something wrong with the government not with the proposal, or submittion of the proposal! time to have a new government i’d say. and that, imo is what’s great about letting the government know you’re scrutinizing the law they pass. because they know if they pass twisted laws, it’s gonna come back and haunt them at the next GE. so there’s added pressure on them. they can no longer pass laws left right centre, and pull them out of the shelves when it’s time to use, because they know, we’ll be looking at it.
Conclusion: i understand your concerns about the way this was done, and i agree the ideals must be protected and corruption guarded against. but i still feel this is the best way, so long as the proposals remains open for scrutiny. once again, i know you feel something is terribly wrong with all this, so i believe you must have something better in mind. I’d really love to hear it, cos i sincerely cannot think of something better. if you do have it, then i see myself being converted to your cause. until then, i can only agree to disagree.
“I May Not Agree With What You Say… But I’ll Defend To The Death Your Right To Say It.” so voltaire said. hear hear!
p.s. i’m pleased with how this is progressing i.e. remaining civil and level-headed. if i’ve unintentionally offended you, i aplogize in advance.
p.p.s. can i respectfully request that you cut short ur responses? you’re a terrific writer, but i’m afraid the screen and your prolixity don’t exactly make ur responses very accessible to your readers. just a thought!
about 2 years ago
I beg to defer sir under the strongest possible terms, this a tryanny of the ‘false’ majority because in this case the G-15 bloggers have proceeded to do what they have done on the understanding the statistical significant anon bloggers do not even feature in the whole consultative equation – as far as they are concerned, they do not even exist! You show me one, I am not asking for two, three or even four. I am just asking for one instance where they have mentioned this group specifically or even cognized them in their formulae or any where else and if you can do that, I will gladly retract everything, I have said here and go to a monastery. My main point is not only only significant but jugular to the whole discussion here and this is why we have to go back to the terms of reference of how the founding fathers of the Bill of Rights fashioned their constitution – those wise men did not prioritize pragmatism or expediency over this constitutional precondition – you can even say they built it into the process deliberate with knowledge aforethought that it may even slow and inconvenience and possibly hobble the system – you have to ask yourself why did they do that?
I feel it was important then as it is now to stress this point.
Darkness 2008
about 2 years ago
whether they have mentioned anyone specific group or not is besides the point. It is when they mention any specific group then your fear is founded and grounded; it then means they are championing/discriminating for/against groups in particular. in this case, just because they have not mentioned anon bloggers does not mean they are discriminating against them. it is precisely because the proposals seek to amend the regulations on the internet as a whole, and not improve the lot of any one group of bloggers, there are no specific mentions of any groups. since this group of ppl are not mentioned specifically, then we must look to the content of the proposals to see if they have cognized of all bloggers, or sought to advance the interest of any groups of bloggers in particular.
anyway in actual fact, to be picky, they did mention anon bloggers. but only as support to their point being made, and not to benefit/discriminate anon bloggers. Refer to page 11 subpoint B third para.
this is just pure speculation on my part, but may i suggest that it is precisely because G15 knows the danger of power corrupting, that they have purposely stuck to broad based proposals that seek to remove restrictions on the internet; the removal of which will only benefit singaporeans, whether blogger or not.
section 3.4 –> a random pick, to illustrate how their proposals were broad based generic reforms that seek to remove obstacles from bloggers, anon or no. If this section is adopted, then come GE 2011, there will be no fear of political comment or posting of videos. now does that not benefit everyone whether you wish to blog about the GE or not? does it not include everyone? and since it includes everyone, are the anon bloggers not cognized in the formulation?
while the need to protect ideals are important, once again there is no feasible way yet of doing that, and we must rely on the integrity of these 15, and the feedback from us all, to ensure that your fears remain just that. fears. and i think this proposal is sound, both in substance and in style.
hate this formating. why can’t we break paragraphs i dont know.
about 2 years ago
Sigh… People still waste time online?
Strange, this PAP-BH consortium.
Thankfully I no longer identify with Singapore.
about 2 years ago
Dood Day!
Those G15 bloggers keep on insisting its impractical to create an all inclusive consultative committee online, but as we can all see here. If they brought the whole discussion online. I strong believe we would all have benefitted in one way or another. For example reading through this thread, has not only enriched my understanding on many of the finer points of the issues, but it has also provoked a whole range of questions which I would not normally have asked. This in turn is likely to lead me to read up more on it. I guess what I am trying to say is its a form of being informed, consulted and even participating, although I am not like Darkness fighting it out 100 to 1 or something like that. I can be here in the background reading silently and yet participate and involve myself in this whole process, if I really wanted too, I could even add a comment or two and ask question if I really wanted too,like why does Darkness consider Dr B. Leong’s proposal as a very real and present threat to blogosphere?
This thread just shows what can really one be accomplished when there is a very clear resolve to create an online consultative platform. It doesnt even need to be high tech, this will do just as well.
In this case, its clear to me, the G15 just didnt bother and this does not surprise me one bit, as its always easier to reach consensus when one doesnt need to consult others, thats always the appeal of one horse races. Or its easier to bull doze through a contentious point without opposition when only a few even care, understand or know enough abt the issues to really critique and act as a watch dog. In one para, they just couldn’t be bothered. They were derellict, as Darkness said so very wisely, you cannot prioritize expediency, pragmatism and in no way can this exclude the need to abide by the higher principles of consultation. I
DG
about 2 years ago
To The Chief Editor of the Brotherhood Press,
Why does Darkness regard the platform suggested by BL a real and present threat? I was just wondering how does one go about getting a real life interview with Darkness?
Many Thanks
Evelyn
about 2 years ago
Looks like darkness has conceded
about 2 years ago
Hi Makanmatas
Conceded? You mean, you can’t see what’s happened!!!!!!! Alright, I admit the ending is certainly a genre of art house theater, hardly the crouching tiger bang bang you are dead finale. If I read rightly, Darkness has not as much conceded as he has finished the job proper. The importance of its iconography could perhaps be missed out by the uninitiated or those who have no legal training. However to me and others here watching this gun fight, it’s clear as day. Makanmatas, If you really want to understand what has happened and why Darkness has walked away, it’s like asking why a revolution happen? One could say it is better to keep your eye on fluctuating bread prices, rather than fluctuating hemlines to understand the reason behind.
In other words, I believe, he’s gone for what Shipping attorneys in the East Coast refer to as the “Kansas one card shuffle.” To understand how this card vertu, the challenge is to remove only one card, to bring the whole house of cards crashing down. That I believe is what he has successfully done here, by questioning only one point, if you notice very carefully, he keeps all hitting at this one spot time and again, the failure of the 15 bloggers to consult, inform and provide an all inclusive participatory process to the blogging community who he considers to be the statistical significant anon. If you notice that is his main point, thats one of the hall marks of the Kansas shuffle, its one shot, one kill at its best. The ultimate all or nothing quick draw.
That if you notice he doesnt bother with the rest, the rest when seen again this one point, is like someone highlighting badly laid kitchen tiles, loopsided window panes and noisy faucets, while his main point is. Look here! Forget all that, you have bigger issues here. Your house is built on quick sand! And its sinking! That’s how I see it, I could be wrong, but I dont think as I am a long time BP reader. He has done this before. Not many times, but enough to single him out that he’s doing it all over again.
Once this was been established and it was when anon-scared-of-war posted on 22 Apr 2008 at 1:45 am / “whether they have mentioned anyone specific group or not is besides the point. It is when they mention any specific group then your fear is founded and grounded; it then means they are championing/discriminating for/against groups in particular. in this case, just because they have NOT mentioned anon bloggers does not mean they are discriminating against them.” Both the use of the terms “whether” – “have not” killed him dead instantly. I still dont fully understand this part why did the ASOW give it all to him on a sterling silver tray?
One thing is for sure from this point onwards. This will be a question none of the 15 bloggers can successfully answer without running up against this lamp post and under any given condition, this simply means you will never get the support of the thinking crowd. No one supports people who build on quicksand, its just doesnt make any sense.
Good Day
about 2 years ago
sigh.. feel like i should just keep silent, and perhaps i should. probably outgunned in terms of IQ points here but what the heck. gotta stand up for what you believe in aye? it irks me that so many people are out pointing fingers after they’ve done this. hey, join them. or object at the start. now’s too late. If you can talk so much about why it’s wrong, suggest something better. and do it.
and “kansas one card shuffle”? more like ignoring the questions asked. If you’re gonna concede a point, do so clearly, then press home why even if you concede that point your argument still stands. that makes for clearer readings, and shows that ur not afraid to admit you’re wrong. sidestepping questions sounds like things the PAP do. uninitiated? Legal training? pahh. the first thing the judge will do if this happens is ask you “are you conceding the other arguments?” and IMHO no way has his “one shot one kill” point concluded the argument.
“the failure of the 15 bloggers to consult, inform and provide an all inclusive participatory process to the blogging community who he considers to be the statistical significant anon.”
sighhhhhhh.
1. they’ve been asking for people to participate for a long time, on several sites with significant amount of traffic.
2. For the last time, they do not claim to represent everyone
3. can you object to the substance of the key proposals?
3. Neither darkness, nor you, or anyone else, has suggested an alternative to what was done, despite my repeated requests for one. you can point out all the flaws, but can you think of something better? if not then perhaps this IS the way to go. that, or continue complaining about this and that on cyberspace while we wait for other people to do something.
anyway maybe not conceded, but maybe darkness has gone to his monastery :p
and what about the questions about his views on the platforms suggested by BL? the silence is deafening.
about 2 years ago
anon-scared-of-war,
You chalked up a good innings. For a while you had me smoking on my rear end. So theres really nothing to regret. Thank you for the duel, I enjoyed it immensely and I hope you did as well. You know one good thing abt online gun fights is when you die, you could just as well come back again next week.
Do I have a better way to cut the Star of Africa? Yes, I do. What about the rest of the questions, you raised, why am I not responding to them? Well its very simple, I prefer to keep my powder dry for the time being – my feel is its still early days and my judgement tells me its best to keep all my cards close to chest. As many out there may capitalize on it to profile their respective counter arguments – profiling a defense is ok, its their right, but I don’t think, I have any obligation to help them out in that area by volunteering free consultancy. I know this may sound wholly selfish, but I have it under the best authority NLB has highlighted a list of subject matter experts like XX and Mr Brown, maybe you should touch base with them, perhaps they can be of assistance.
Many Thanks Again
David,
Is that the same David that keeps leaving me read extracts from the Atlantic Monthy in my inbox, that I auto delete? How are you? – you know what? I want thump you David. Have you ever considered why magicians and fire eaters never ever tell the public how they perform their tricks? You just told the whole wide world! You know what that means don’t you? I can’t use by fav spanner anymore Dave. It’s no good. See what you’ve done?
I swear to God, I have never ever heard of any Kansas blah blah blah trick bfr. If you must know, this whole strategy was conceptualized by 3 regular readers of the BHP, they are Dotty, Montburan and Anongal. I met up recently with them in the CBD in Delifrance – those legal piranha’s were the ones who suggested that I should move only on one point and disregard the rest; the said to me, “if you kick this one door down, the whole rotten structure comes tumbling down.” So perhaps there are similarities with you highlight about the house of cards? I dunno really, but it has something to do with a legal body of knowledge that relates to the idea of ‘ultra vires’ – I know it rhymes with ultraman, but its got nothing to do with dead rays and karate chops – I don’t exactly know what this term means. I am not a lawyer. Besides I am usually too petrified to ask any questions when I with these garang ladies. As I have made so many MCP jokes, that I really live in fear that someone will one day sue me right down to my precious guli’s – at best I only have a rudimentary knowledge of the concept of ultra vires – its best Dave, if you google it up yourself. As the last thing I want to do here; is to confuse you, me along with the readers.
Dave you owe me brand new spanner!
about 2 years ago
haha thanks darkness. i enjoy a good discussion too…
seems like you assume i’ve lost, i dunno why. but… doesn’t matter anyway. i guess we can only agree to disagree. at least it made people think. then it’s not in vain.
as for the better alternative…. hahaha looks like i can’t get a straight answer no matter how hard i try. i guess i’ll just have to wait till u implement it. or something
and yes ur frens are right
but of course if you wanna do that you need to frame it properly too, and not just ignore the other points. if not the “judge” will ask the question above again. you can check with them about this, i suspect they’ll agree, that it’s important how you shape this “shot”. 
about 2 years ago
It seems that Darkness made two fundamental errors in his arguments, and I can’t for one see why his brotherhood (perhaps they are of the same sockpuppets he command.
1. The bloggers never claim to represent anyone. Instead, he resort to smearing the bloggers while not coming with ANY alternative to the models proposed.
2. They asked everyone to join in and none of them are done by invitation. Only those volunteered went ahead and drafted the document. Perhaps, Darkness should ask himself. If he’s so eagerly wanted attention and acknowledgement from NLB, maybe he should turn up for these events.
Once again, we have found that Darkness is a useless piece of trash who cannot think properly and wants to be acknowledged.
about 2 years ago
Anti Darkness.
G15 Never claim to represent anyone? You are trully confused. they dont need too. if the law changes. Everyone will affected stupid!
They asked every one to join in? It was an open invite? but did they provision any privacy for anon bloggers? If they did not then it is as good as discriminating against them. How come alex doesnt know he is supposed to be a gay activist right? So you mean he doesnt know simple things like if you go to a carpark and it doesnt have disable parking lots its just as good as the owner saying we dont want you people in wheelchairs here. They dont need to say it out, when you structure it that way, that sends out a very clear message to us all anon bloggers. We ask you to just give us all a say, what do you do? Nothing, we get nothing. Even in their stupid G15 committee u have 3 category but no anon blogger. Why is it so hard to get a voice. Why cant we do it online? Why cant everyone participate?
Another thing I have notice here and in the online citizen. Everyone who do not support the 15 bloggers is shouted down and asked to justify or get out or asked to drink hemlock. While everyone who support the 15 blogger is a comrade in arms and loyal to the blogging spirit. So this is supposed to be your freer and more democratic net is it?
I dont think, I want to give it any support I dont see it even recognise me
about 2 years ago
about 2 years ago
Dear jujube.
firstly, no one is shouted down, here or anywhere. it’s what debate is all about. If you feel that there are more people voicing their support than people against it, then perhaps it simply means that more people support it!
has that occurred to you?
They may have taken the lead, and once again. it is IMPOSSIBLE (there i’ve said it) to get EVERYONE’s consensus. What do you propose? an open forum where people can post their suggestions? getting everyone to meet up at padang then we have a mass orgy meeting? who will moderate? who will decide what goes in? How how how? like how i’ve asked darkness several times, tell me how? Perhaps what they’ve done IS the BEST way to get the ball rolling. Do you have a better way?
and like you mentioned. the proposed change affects everyone. how can the proposals then be discriminating against anon bloggers? did they propose that people can no longer blog anonymously? I’m sure you could have joined, and asked ur name not to be published there. but you and many others probably saw it and forgot about it. until now.
Are the proposals for the better, or worse? please answer that too. they’ve ensured transparency by publishing it on the web. do you think they will do that if they are out to discriminate against anyone?
Continue to push for your “recognition” and “procedural propriety” and “everyone must be heard and represented” and we can continue to let the MIW dictate and control our rights on the internet. Sort of reminds me of CSJ and his detractors.
The tree of liberty must from time to time be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots. – Thomas Jefferson
noticed he mentioned patriots too. brave (wo)men must step up to preserve our liberty. there are no space for backbenchers in this fight. take ownership of your life, or be owned by others.
about 2 years ago
and just thinking. how do you propose they recognise you?
“jujube shall have the right to blog whatever he wants”
or anonymous bloggers?
“bloggers shall retain the right to blog anonymously.” Hello it’s rather silly isn’t it? I think our country not THAT jialat yet lah.. until need to state this kind of thing explicitly…
did they recognize other groups of bloggers? never also lehhh. so what’s ur objection? what’s realllly your objection?
is it that you dint get to voice your concerns? well. i’d say that’s your fault for choosing not to speak up at the time. anyway it’s not too late! it’s never too late. like they mentioned, it’s just preliminary anyway. get the ball rolling, if you want.
10 friends were out in town one day. dinner time approaches, so one of them (A) askes, to no one in particular “eh later go where eat ah?”. A, B and C says Macdonalds cos no money. D and E says Crystal Jade cos got xiao long bao. F, G, H, I J never say anything. so they went Macdonalds. upon reaching, F kaobei say why go macdonalds? he wanted to eat KFC, cos got cheese fries. G kaobei say he want to go newton, cos got stingray. you tell me. what is the morale of the story?
about 2 years ago
The G-15 proposal is finished! Here is the spirit blow. Darkness has gone for the one thrust classical kill.
http://singaporedaily.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/sgdaily-roundup-what%e2%80%99s-hot-in-week-17/#comment-1901
It’s over.
about 2 years ago
no time no time lah. can summarise or not? back up ur statement with proof lah. and puh-leaze suddenly everyone is saying one thrust here one kill there after Mr david brought it up. getting stale man. aiya tired lah. all talk no action. can point out all the problems but cannot give even ONE suggestion. tired of asking for better alternative. no wonder no one likes to step out. come out only kenna bash.
anon bloggers if really want to contribute then could always have signed up and requested to remain anon. anyone tried or not? anyone bothered? did anyone even sound out when they first began the call? anyone pointed out this “flaw” in the system? got? anyone even cared? doubt so cos that takes effort. more effort than sitting behind the screen bashing it up anyway.
tired. good bye.
about 2 years ago
It is finished and you all know it. However, I can understand if you all have to put up a brave front, btw how many flags do you have flying?
about 2 years ago
Harphoon,
It’s absolute disgrace that you claim that Darkness has driven the nail in. First of all, Darkness has made rubbish claims on the people who have written the proposal. Second, he is just hanking to be recognized. Btw, I think that he’s an absolute disgrace and the whole Brotherhood is just a farce designed to be stupid and idiotic.
about 2 years ago
Harpoon
What really puzzles me is YB, TOC and the rest of the 15 bloggers hammered out over 21 points (at least thats how many I counted, could be wrong). However, in this case, it seems like Darkness has said to the rest of the boys, forget the rest of the 21 and he has just gone for the throat of the community regulator and the tripartite committee proposed by Dr Bernard Leong.
Why?
Another thing, how prominent is the involvement of the ASDF?
http://singaporedaily.wordpress.com/2008/04/29/daily-sg-29-apr-2008/#comment-1919
I dont believe this could have emerged from the brain of only one man; the sheer breadth, depth and scope is just unimaginative.
Why is the ASDF hidding in the background? Who else is behind them?
I really hope to get a reply Harphy.
Best Wishes
Sphgirl
about 2 years ago
Sphgal.
Let’s try to keep it all in perspective. I think, if you read very carefully what Darkness is trying to say. It’s simply this. What happens if this community regulator gets hijacked, abducted, co-opted or if the members which make it up no longer have the interest of bloggers at heart? Will it end up like our newspapers? Where instead of real news; we are getting something that is really a mix of fact and opinion which is designed to serve a self aggrandizing agenda? How will this raise the bar on freedom?
His point is. In what way does this bring any value to blogging as an activity that cuts to the truth? See his point?
The other thing he is trying to say is the net is free now because it is really like a perfect communist system where everyone is really very equal as there is no one super social structure. But we must never take this fact for granted. As all this can very well change in one blink of an eye.
As this community moderator is not a play play thing. I think most people don’t really understand how powerful this body actually is. Bernard will of course say it does not have any real legal power, but Darkness will point out. Why do you need real power? When you can pin a scarlet letter on someone? For all to see and to fall in line? See his point.
I think what he’s trying to say is we should all be mindful of the dangers and not just buy into this idea because it is mooted by bloggers and not the govt or someone who is not part of our online community. He is saying, never forget this is a very lousy system even if it is staffed by very noble and well intentioned bloggers so what? How far can they go with a lousy system? Will you put your trust in good people or good systems? Doing the former can easily lead to abuse and our greater detriment.
Here I think when most bloggers look at this G-15 proposal especially the idea of the community moderator, there are really two minds at work in the crowd.
The first group will see this wooden horse as a gift from the deity Poseidon and they will even moot the idea; gifts from Gods should be venerated and even celebrated.
Then again there are others like Darkness who, if I may add is a very skilled commander who has fought over 1,500 cyber battles in the virtual with only a loss of 25, here he saying to crowd, lets set it on fire here and now – only because when he looks at this Trojan horse; he is not looking at it as much as he is trying to figure out how many soldiers are in the belly? What is their plan? And what will happen if it is brought into the city walls? Do you see now?
This I think is the whole issue, but regrettably none of the G-15 are even considering, discussing or even thinking beyond the stated implications raised. If you look at all of them, they are going around like sleep walkers writing about everything from Tibet to what some hack reporter in ST wrote. This is very strange to us, as this proposal is so important that it’s a bit like floating an idea to partition Singapore into two separate countries. So why aren’t they even discussing it to explore the broader implications of their proposal? Isn’t it important to you and me? Or maybe the motivation to see it through is so strong? So really how is really behind this?
I went cycling with Darkness last night and I asked him this question and all he said is, this form of madness is not so unusual, when you consider just 10 minutes before the titanic keeled over, there was a string quartered playing on the deck oblivious to the panic and the pandemonium which would have ensued.
You can read this as you wish.
Cheers
Harphoon
Pls note the BP has gone to full combat mode / all communications, post etc will cease from today onwards.
about 2 years ago
Dear all,
At the end of the day if the goal is to separate the wheat from the chaff – don’t have to make it so complicated. What lanchaiu is the G-15 talking about when they claim that its inconvenient, impractical and unwieldy to solicit the views of netizens. This is a pastry argument.
If you really want to get a handle on whether they have even pitched it right for you and me. All you have to do is conduct a poll using Aaron’s side bar poll ticker; we can all trust Aaron as he will never doctor the results simply because he has no interest in the matter. The same cannot be said of any of the G-15 who conduct a poll.
3 questions that really go into the heart of the whole matter is all that is required to settle this matter, divided into (1) I think the idea of a community moderator is good (2) I think the idea of a community regulator is bad (3) I am dunno.
That should give you all good spread of the views. You see at the end of the day; it’s not what I say or even how convincing I am or even what the G-15 choose to say and not say. Or even what some wax works rep of some govt says or decides which day to take emergency leave – at the end of the day; it is all about you. It has always been about you, but somewhere in this story; it was chapter was abducted –so when you vote, just do so for the right reasons; because one day when you are an old man and when a kid comes up to you and ask you why our internet looks more like mogadishu on a bad hair day and not the city of lights like Paris, at least you can say, thats what I told them.
No need to talk so much la. If you really have the balls load the game and press the start button – we will take it from there, the rest is really just commentary. You see they would have you all believe; since there is no noise; everyone agrees with them; not knowing when there is silence, its really the worst form of assurance as it just means there is always a lull before a storm.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=LOkSn6UGPI8
Darkness 2008
about 2 years ago
Dear all,
You see when the stakes shoot right up and it requires someone’s guli’s to be placed on the railway tracks in a game of ‘first one to grab his crown jewels and jumps off is chicken’ dont be surprise when you look around and everyone is either playing hide and seek, avoiding eye contact or just pretending they didnt hear you.
Do you now understand how the game is played? Anyone who doesnt know this just has no idea what life is all about.
Do have a very productive week head
Thank you
Darkness 2008
about 2 years ago
Hi
Phew!!! heng ah!!!! I am just glad, I am not on the receiving end of the blast wall. If it was us, I think most of us will go on MC or decide to clear our annual leave till everything thing simmers down. The part none of us can figure out is this. If this BPH and darknes character is such a motor mouth, why didnt Alex and the others pin him down first and put something sweet in his mouth before deciding to float this proposal. I cant help but feel, they may have set themselves up for the proverbial fall. As this guy is just like one of those nightmare bad dreams, he keeps coming out again and again. And he writes well, so many of us pheng in the office when we all read his rants
Whatever the outcome, this is my personal $0.20 cents, you people best sort it out yourself as this guy has not only raised many important and intelligent points, but he has also highlighted many things which we have not even considered, let alone conduct any studies on.
So they are even years ahead of us. Though I would like to know how many % of it comes from gaming and their internet interaction. Is possible to have a break down?It is a mistake not to make full use of such a resource treasure trove. Just my 2 cents
I hope everything sorts itself all for all concerned, good luck
about 2 years ago
????????????????????????????????????? – my friends do I know myself? Do I know you all G-15? Yes. But you are not my enemy.
This is where I will draw the line with my sword and stick it in the ground. I will not go further as I have no intention to win at the expense of the internet;
You, the G-15 are not that important to me; besides you are no match; when you love something with a pure heart; it is easy to give it all and more.
I have accomplished what I have set out to do; that is all that matters.
But my intention was never to fight and win at expense of the internet; as the saying goes; we cannot run from ourselves.
When you know this; all is possible even the act of lowering your sword when you should not.
This is the art of war. This is life. This is what it means to love something completely with all your heart. This is what it means to do the right thing.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=RBG05g4-H9o&feature=related
This is where I Darkness will stop and so will everyone else.
It is over. You have all got the message I trust. So I hope all of you what to do.
Thank you.
Darkness 2008-05-03
about 2 years ago
micashol, the whole initiative was by volunteers. no one was invited. If they had invited darkness, i foresee another darkness-wannabe asking why HE wasn’t invited. anyway i think asking for volunteers is good.
sphgirl, looks like no one answered ur question about ASDF. but what’s new. It seems like the main aim of this “argument” is really all about winning, not clearing things up. how? by only answering things that benefit you and ignoring those that don’t.
“What lanchaiu is the G-15 talking about when they claim that its inconvenient, impractical and unwieldy to solicit the views of netizens. This is a pastry argument.”?
secondly, was that referring to me? not aware G15 made any such representations. please be clear that I’m not from the G15. If i am i’ll have more balls and use my real name rather than hide behind a lame screen name.
first, i think the accepted spelling for lanjiao is, well. lanjiao. or lanchiao not lanchaiu.
what’s so pastry about it? heard of necessity? you have a better way? (another question that’s never gonna get answered). you seem to be able to point out all the flaws, but until you can raise a viable alternative you’re not gonna get any respect from me. and of course the predictable response that you don’t need my respect nyeh nyeh.
but what’s ur alternative? besides sitting on our asses waiting for the moderator (yes the government) to continue clamping down on us.
Yes i dare to concede *gasp?! concede???* that you’re right and you’ve got a point. but i stand by my stand, that it’s the best way we have now. what’s YOUR response to that?
about 2 years ago
oh yeah harphon? G15 =/= TOC.
about 2 years ago
Coeey all,
The one that really swung me over to their side was this one. You can find the full interview. herehttp://singaporedaily.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/sgdaily-roundup-what%e2%80%99s-hot-in-week-17/#comment-1902, it looks like a many parter and its quite detailed. I am sorry, I am pasting whole chunks of it, but if I edit it, the point somehow loses its meaning. This came to me by ordinary slow mail. I have searched through the whole archive in the online citizen and even Yawning bread’s site. Nowhere are we even given the alternative and counter view. What remains very ironical is this. These 15 bloggers claim deregulation = freedom, but why are even censoring this type of material from their sites, isn’t it important? Dont we have a right to know.
“THE FALLACY OF COMMUNITY REGULATION – PART 3B / THE FINAL CHAPTER
Question: Darkness isnt a deregulated net logically better than one that’s regulated? Because its more flexible, less draconian and perhaps even more democratic.
Answer: More flexible blah blah. Hey, I dont know where you got that from. To me that’s just a marketing tag line that most people buy into without really thinking about it. I don’t believe life is so simple. You don’t foreclose on lets say communism and automatically get happy democracy. That only happens in the movies. This we saw when the USSR collapsed, it did not produce good as much as a tsunami of bad that brought with it; run away inflation, transmigration; balkanization which even fueled partisan and sectarian divide which mushroomed into a civil war. To a limited extent this was also what’s currently unfolding in Iraq; decamp from dictatorship and instead of happy democracy, what you get instead is closer to a self styled Iranian theocracy – the sum of all our fears.
So we need to be very careful; just because the G-15 have a nice logo and it comes with pad lock that’s half open, you mean that’s all it takes to persuade your intellect, we are going to get a better net?
That’s why I believe the question really boils down to a mechanical analysis when the G-15 say, we are going to deregulate it can only mean we will get a better net, if the means remains sound; but how sound is it; when 94% of the bloggers weren’t even given an opportunity to participate in the process? This is very different from don’t want to participate. I have to be crystal clear here. There is no way of participating because at no time did the proponents of G-15 even provision for anon bloggers to do so without compromising their elemental right to privacy – so even from the word go, you got the cart before the horse – how the hell are you going to make any progress, I have absolutely no idea; where is the freer so called net in all this. Because I can argue when you deny and that’s what they did, not deliberately but by design the statistical majority then how does that even raise the bar on freedom? ”
I really cannot see how far the 15 bloggers can go if they have to grapple with points as scapel sharp as this? How? Though I dont agree with the 15 bloggers. I dont agree that a poll should be conducted. This will only embarrass many and in future discourage the spirit of volunteerism.
I hope all bloggers will unite despite our differences.
about 2 years ago
“This is where I will draw the line with my sword and stick it in the ground. I will not go further as I have no intention to win at the expense of the internet.”
Bambi Darkness Bad Boy, this is a very wise decision and we are all very proud of you. There is a lesson here, when the PAP went after J.Gomez during the last general elections. At first many ppl supported them, but they didnt know when to “draw the line” and “stick it in the ground.” They just kept on going on and on and on. You see when you have made your point, most people will support you, but when you go overboard with it. They you run the risk of squandering the good will. Then many will ask. If he is so petty and small hearted. How can he be entrusted to do big things? How can he make out the big picture from the small?
This is good Bambi. We are all very proud of you.
about 2 years ago
Just because this Darkness joker lost the arguments, he slinks back to where he belongs. Yawn.
Going by his logic, he should have asked for the opinion of the other anonymous bloggers first as to whether people like us had a voice or not, or whether they wanted to have a hand in the proposal or not (he certainly didn’t bother to ask me, and he certainly didn’t bother to ask anyone whom I know blogs anonymously). It just reeks of sour grapes – much like someone who missed out on a warehouse sale and then says “they should have extended it for me, I don’t care”.
Comparing this joker to the 15 people, all but one who actually own blogs, I have no doubt that this dumbass Darkness certainly represents me less than them since he doesn’t even have a current blog [the blog comments he and his bunch of knuckleheads vomit in the blogosphere as blog comments don't count].