Friday, February 06, 2009
13:03 by FoxTwo
Now, recently, 2 ministers made public statements and actually prompted me to write something here on them. Now, let me just say, generally I have no problem with the government of Singapore. It's only on rare occasions like this that I feel I need to write about the people inside the government.
First off - Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts Lui Tuck Yew. He was commenting on the incident of how Yio Chu Kang MP Seng Han Thong was attacked by an irate constituent. An online poll showed that more people were sympathetic to the attacker, ie the unhappy constituent, than for the victim, in this case, MP Seng Han Thong. He noted that many comments were made and most were "unhelpful, a significant number were unkind, a small number were downright outrageous". Then he went on to say "...I do not think the community itself have done enough to rebut some of these unhelpful comments delivered by fellow netizens"
Only one thing comes to mind when I read that - he does not appear to accept that people DO have differing opinions from "the norm", or perhaps in this case, him. Yes of course, the poll showed that more people sympathised with the attacker rather than the victim, and I think he thinks it should be the other way round.
Next, we are not so free to flame forum trolls. If we did, our bosses will think we are not working, and give us more work to do. When we reach home after work, do you think the majority of people will sit down and face the computer? As many people I have worked with in the past have said - "you look at computer all day in office, go home still see more ah? Crazy ah?". Yup, you can discount this bunch of people. Once they go home, they don't even go online.
Another reason why we don't flame them back - like maybe perhaps they MIGHT have a good point?
Besides, any veteran "netizen" would have known not to feed the trolls. All they want is just attention. The more you "debunk" or "denounce" them, the bigger the flames get.
By not feeding the trolls we are already "self-regulating". We have already decided not to help increase the "damage".
Or perhaps Mr Lui considers "self regulation" as "defending a government official". Or perhaps Mr Lui never considered that people are more sympathetic to the attacker simply because the attacker actually deserved the sympathy? Or that the victim, actually had done something wrong (meaning the attacker might actually have a reason)?
I believe the term "self regulation" has been mis-used here. I hold the opinion that self-regulation means we don't do things that are against the law, be it written or unwritten. For example, we don't set up porn sites, we don't distribute pirated software. We don't set up a website to degrade religions or race. We don't libel or slander people on the net. It does not mean we surf forums and defend everything that mentions an MP and an angry online mob.
One last thing - doesn't the government already have people surfing the net to try to defend the government in online forums and such, already?? If not, perhaps it's time they do. If you leave this up to the netizens, they WILL speak their minds (and it's usually the truth) - and if they choose to sympathise with the attacker rather than the victim, that's just how the wind blows. You can't be upset because the majority of the people think the attacker deserves more sympathy than the victim!
Next, Nominated MP Loo Choon Yong and his comment on people not making enough babies even though we are on a 5-day work week.
I believe no one can provide a retort better than this guy here.
Basically, just because we're not making babies doesn't mean you need to overload us with work. What, has it become a "Fuck or Work, choose one" kind of deal now?
What I believe has missed his grasp completely, is that if we do succeed and produce more mouths to feed at home, it is only natural that we will need more $$$. To get more $$$, don't you think some of us will "work harder"? Doesn't this contribute to "productivity"?
Well at least those in the older generation like Mr Loo will think that way. The younger generation know that having multiple sources of income means LESS WORK, MORE MONEY (the basis of every Internet scam). They don't work hard more. They actually work less and get more money.
Perhaps it's time people wake up and realise that "working hard" doesn't always equate to higher productivity. Same as longer time spent in office doesn't mean higher productivity. People are now mobile, and can work anywhere, anytime. Technically we should not even need a 5-day work week anymore, nor even an "office"! When there's really work to be done, people WILL do it. When there's no work to be done (eg no clients), no point forcing them to sit in the office and surf the net.
Speaking of that, might as well cut off Internet. Historically speaking, Internet usage in the office has traditionally been the highest productivity killer than anything else. Facebook, anyone? So, should we work 7 days a week since Internet came to Singapore and productivity has fallen?
Yeah right.
13:03 by FoxTwo
Quirky Singaporeans - Weird Ministers
Now, recently, 2 ministers made public statements and actually prompted me to write something here on them. Now, let me just say, generally I have no problem with the government of Singapore. It's only on rare occasions like this that I feel I need to write about the people inside the government.
First off - Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts Lui Tuck Yew. He was commenting on the incident of how Yio Chu Kang MP Seng Han Thong was attacked by an irate constituent. An online poll showed that more people were sympathetic to the attacker, ie the unhappy constituent, than for the victim, in this case, MP Seng Han Thong. He noted that many comments were made and most were "unhelpful, a significant number were unkind, a small number were downright outrageous". Then he went on to say "...I do not think the community itself have done enough to rebut some of these unhelpful comments delivered by fellow netizens"
Only one thing comes to mind when I read that - he does not appear to accept that people DO have differing opinions from "the norm", or perhaps in this case, him. Yes of course, the poll showed that more people sympathised with the attacker rather than the victim, and I think he thinks it should be the other way round.
Next, we are not so free to flame forum trolls. If we did, our bosses will think we are not working, and give us more work to do. When we reach home after work, do you think the majority of people will sit down and face the computer? As many people I have worked with in the past have said - "you look at computer all day in office, go home still see more ah? Crazy ah?". Yup, you can discount this bunch of people. Once they go home, they don't even go online.
Another reason why we don't flame them back - like maybe perhaps they MIGHT have a good point?
Besides, any veteran "netizen" would have known not to feed the trolls. All they want is just attention. The more you "debunk" or "denounce" them, the bigger the flames get.
By not feeding the trolls we are already "self-regulating". We have already decided not to help increase the "damage".
Or perhaps Mr Lui considers "self regulation" as "defending a government official". Or perhaps Mr Lui never considered that people are more sympathetic to the attacker simply because the attacker actually deserved the sympathy? Or that the victim, actually had done something wrong (meaning the attacker might actually have a reason)?
I believe the term "self regulation" has been mis-used here. I hold the opinion that self-regulation means we don't do things that are against the law, be it written or unwritten. For example, we don't set up porn sites, we don't distribute pirated software. We don't set up a website to degrade religions or race. We don't libel or slander people on the net. It does not mean we surf forums and defend everything that mentions an MP and an angry online mob.
One last thing - doesn't the government already have people surfing the net to try to defend the government in online forums and such, already?? If not, perhaps it's time they do. If you leave this up to the netizens, they WILL speak their minds (and it's usually the truth) - and if they choose to sympathise with the attacker rather than the victim, that's just how the wind blows. You can't be upset because the majority of the people think the attacker deserves more sympathy than the victim!
Next, Nominated MP Loo Choon Yong and his comment on people not making enough babies even though we are on a 5-day work week.
I believe no one can provide a retort better than this guy here.
Basically, just because we're not making babies doesn't mean you need to overload us with work. What, has it become a "Fuck or Work, choose one" kind of deal now?
What I believe has missed his grasp completely, is that if we do succeed and produce more mouths to feed at home, it is only natural that we will need more $$$. To get more $$$, don't you think some of us will "work harder"? Doesn't this contribute to "productivity"?
Well at least those in the older generation like Mr Loo will think that way. The younger generation know that having multiple sources of income means LESS WORK, MORE MONEY (the basis of every Internet scam). They don't work hard more. They actually work less and get more money.
Perhaps it's time people wake up and realise that "working hard" doesn't always equate to higher productivity. Same as longer time spent in office doesn't mean higher productivity. People are now mobile, and can work anywhere, anytime. Technically we should not even need a 5-day work week anymore, nor even an "office"! When there's really work to be done, people WILL do it. When there's no work to be done (eg no clients), no point forcing them to sit in the office and surf the net.
Speaking of that, might as well cut off Internet. Historically speaking, Internet usage in the office has traditionally been the highest productivity killer than anything else. Facebook, anyone? So, should we work 7 days a week since Internet came to Singapore and productivity has fallen?
Yeah right.
Labels: Rant, Singapore, Singaporeans
