Where is the 2cents worth?

I was going through Sammyboy Forums, of which the ratio of good, readable content to trash-talk/flamewar/whining is approximately 1:1000. Whenever I sift through the site I feel like I am a lone diver trawling the entire span of the Pacific Ocean looking for less than half a dozen pearls.

I was actually looking for AcidFlask related material, when one forummer queried about how the opposition parties failed to get in their 2 cents worth on the AF-A*Star saga.

I pondered upon this thought for a while. I was surprised, as I am inclined to think that this was the exact kind of subject material the Opposition Opportunists love to capitalise on. They were indeed strangely subdued over this matter.

A few seconds later, the answer hit me like a tonne of falling bricks.


UPDATE:
This was meant to be a brief observational post on opposition parties silence over the AF-A*Star affair. Interestingly it has garnered (imho) various top quality comments ancillary to the original post.

To find out more about Han's indignance at being labelled 'pro-PAP', Redrown's (me) 'anthropological' study of Sammyboy Forums, Gilbert Koh's reaction to SDP's unauthorised lifting of his articles, Goh Meng Seng's (WP) opinion of non-partisan bloggers and name calling, and Huichieh's excellent justification and clarification of (non-partisan) bloggers position, click on the comments!

UPDATE 2:
Huichieh continues to chew upon the role of non-partisan bloggers in civil society, reflecting on Jeffrey's insightful comment. As he (Jeff) aptly puts it, we are simply "Equal Opportunity Commentators". That would be a good starting point for anyone who do not fully appreciate our niche.

Open Letter to Mr Philip Yeo

Congratulations on your victory. A bitter victory that perhaps left quite a few scars.

AcidFlask has apologised in the manner you wanted him to.

But, tell me, was it worth it?

Was it really necessary? Did it do more hurt than heal in the end?

What are the repercussions on your reputation? The very same reputation that you strive so hard to upkeep?

Did the apology reassure you, made you sleep tighter at night? Did the apology improve your quality of life in any way? Did it do wonders for your ego? (ok don't answer the last).

It was supposed to be a simple, clearcut shushing procedure.

How did it get blown up? Why did it get blown up? Why did it enthrall so many local and foreign entities?

Would it then contrastingly have become more of a loudhailer effect?

Were their interest in the affairs in your best interests?

On Hindsight, would there have been a better way to resolve the issue? One more subtle, one more proportionate, one more reasonable?

On Hindsight, would it have been better to dismiss it with a wave of your hand? He is but a student, whereas you are the head of a government agency. The repute and goodwill that have accrued over the years surely outweigh the student's. Do you doubt that people will see your good works in a different light just because of a simple student's inane comments on an obscure blog? If so, why?

I, for one, do not doubt, nor have ever doubted your esteemed name or works, nor will this issue affect my opinion in any way. However, this event has cast a dark cloud over sensitive, fragile issues such as the Singapore's reputation in the eyes of the world and free speech. It has planted seeds of doubt which would hopefully not be allowed to sprout. I recognise that defending your name is important. But in the same vein I beseech you to understand our position (as citizens of Singapore, and as purveyors of free speech).

I do sincerely hope that it was worth it.

Taking a Stand

Latest developments are well covered in From a Singapore Angle, Singapore Ink Tomorrow.sg, Singabloodypore, and other sites, reproducing AcidFlask's reply to A*Star.

It is, by far, the most revealing and insightful content to the entire debacle so far. One wonders why Mr Yeo, who seems to have plenty of time and resources to spend on engaging lawyers to handle every single minute potential legalities with regards to his esteemed name, has not found the time and resources to produce a proper, detailed and concise statement. (I suppose its in drafting now, right, I hope???) AcidFlask also mentions that Mr Yeo has not pointed out exactly what material was defamatory. May I suggest the generalisation is perhaps due to inability to pick out specific red-letter material? That it was just used as a general measure to oppress someone? Of course, it may just be that Mr Yeo, busy man that he is, has not enough time to do specifically pick out the nitty gritty (P.S This is a Fair Comment and should not be construed otherwise).

From the latest developments, it is becoming more evident that it is not too far off from the purely speculatory Hypothetical Libel scenario I envisioned what seems like a long time ago now.

It is heartening to see AcidFlask not being intimidated. It is heartening to see that he is making his own stance, unafraid to point out glaring inaccuracies in news reports. It is heartening to see that he is taking taking has stand against someone who wields far more power and influence than him. It can be likened to a kid who stands up against his physically stronger bully and his friends – taking them on and challenging them (P.S I am not insinuating anyone is a bully – I am just using abstract analogy).

And it is heartening to see fellow bloggers aiding him in whatever ways they can possible, standing up for him. Because this is not just about a student against a government agency any more. This is about blogging, freedom of speech. This is about the reputation of the very country we are living in, in terms of press freedom, in the eyes of our own citizens, in the eyes of foreign entities. Perhaps, while A*Star claims to defend the reputation of Singapore, they have inadvertently done the exact opposite, which will be highly unfortunate. We must strive to clarify and rectify this.

Because publicity of the real facts, the real issues at hand, will let us all have a clearer insight to the whole debacle. That is why bloggers who feel strongly towards preservation of blogging (which is the best bastion of free speech in Singapore) – should do their part (but should not be forced into doing so) - by the best way they can - public support on their public blogs.

We now await Mr Phillip Yeo's reply to the whole matter. Any refusal to construct a reply, with his own version of events, with full clarification of what he did and why he did it, (and what words were construed defamatory), could now be construed as a sign that, maybe perhaps even the esteemed Mr Phillip Yeo may just have been a little too sensitive this time round, maybe he did overreact to what are no more than harmless commonplace every-day conversational jibes. Dare I also suggest, maybe there is more to the threat than meets the eye...(Fair Comment!!)

However, I am sure that he will write out his own version of events. I sincerely await that, because then we will have a clear picture of events from both sides. The full picture, the vantage point of a neutral observer.

We can then analyse both accounts and decide whether AcidFlask's defensiveness was justified or esteemed Mr Philip Yeo's original aggrievement was justified.

*(Having met esteemed Mr Yeo before, I do think he comes across as a good person. I do find his legal threats ..out of character..but of course I do not know him that well)
*I do hope the entire matter is clarified soon enough. This is certainly a case of having dirty linen aired out in public, which is unfortunate. However, it is hoped that since it is already full-blown, it would be useful if settlement of this issue serves as a precedent, so that bloggers will be more clear and aware of their responsibilities and liabliites.

Making Martyrs out of Molehills

I thought the Singapore blogosphere had finally laid the ghosts of the tripartite CZ-Infantile-AcidFlask affair to rest. I had wanted to post about some inane, out of point topic (ie resume normal service) but evidently there are somethings I just cannot resist commenting on.

Apparently some very 'insidious' smart aleck has instigated MrBrown, MrMiyagi, Xiaxue and CowboyCaleb to 'use their voice' against what he – i use the word 'he' because it is probably one misguided individual – perceives as a miscarriage of justice, a oppressive, bully tactics against freedom of speech.

MrBrown and especially MrMiyagi and CowboyCaleb reacted with indignance, castigating the instigator with biting posts. I think Xiaxue reacted the best in such situations, which is effectively ignoring the post as if it never existed (i think she is somewhat used to doing that anyway, heh, but thats another matter).

Nevertheless it is somewhat perturbing to see yet another matter go out of hand. Firstly, while I fully sympathise AND empathise with AcidFlask, I do think inevitably it is a matter between 2 parties, as opposed to the forces of good against the forces of evil as some have made it out to be. And somehow I doubt that most are actually genuinely sympathetic towards AcidFlask, but rather, seizing this opportunity to further their political agenda, effectively making AcidFlask a hapless martyr. Grabbing whatever little morsels they have about the issue, they use it to further their own personal cause and grievances. Adopting a siege mentality – blogs against authorities. Freedom of Speech against Opression. Which is still ok, except that you should pick your own fights, you do not expect others to fight your battles for you, you do not use others to fight your own battles. You are probably one of those persons who complain that the gov 'never lets us make any decisions for ourselves', and if this is what is going to happen if they do let you have freedom to do whatever you want, then I'm sorry to say I'd rather the gov reins in on your petty tail than to let you wreak complete anarchy upon us.

I put it to you, that you are merely using 'freedom of expression' as just another convenient tool to further your own personal grudges and distaste against the establishment. Worse still, you martyr others for your own cause. Frankly, on a scale of respect for such perpetrators between 0-10, you rank about -15, and thats kind because you probably meant well but are seriously misguided.

If I may suggest, you could start by starting your own blog to highlight whatever grievances you have, you could start by championing your own cause yourself- and not expecting others to do your trumpet calling for you. And write your own original stuff, and not lambasting others for not doing so.

And then Gilbert of SLMJD finds that his works have been literally copied and pasted unto a political website without his permission or knowledge. Pardon me but that is just blatantly STUPID, not to mention DUMB. Obviously Gilbert is none too happy about having his works copied and his name associated with a party he has absolutely no affilations with. I have no idea what they were trying to achieve by lifting his texts, other than pissing off a lawyer – not the wisest of things to do imho, especially since this can be an extremely grave offence. As Gilbert has mentioned, even students ask permission to use his work in private school projects. This is simply basic courtesy, respecting others work and crediting them where they are due. NOTE: THIS is what freedom of expression is about. By abusing others works without permission, you have committed the most grievous sin against expression itself, by infringing on others freedom of expression, so to actually claim to want to promote freedom of expression is a farce. This is also what the Courtesy Campaign is about – and you wonder why the Gov takes the trouble to have such campaigns. The answer could very well be found by looking at yourself.

Gilbert also mentions an email about a perpetrator who wanted Gilbert to join 'the opposition', then claiming he is 'of no use' after he politely declined their offer. Again this scenario is another instance of stupidity, and a certain conclusion can be derived from these events.

Some People Just Don't Understand What is Free Speech. Some people don't understand that with freedom comes responsibility not to abuse it or abuse others right to use it. Perhaps that is why the checks and balances in place are arguably more stringent than elsewhere. Note to you: The word 'Free' in Free speech is not to be taken literally

By taking such misguided steps, it is, in effect, one step forward and two steps backward. If one wishes to champion free speech then he should firstly ensure that he truly understands what free speech entails. Then, instead of abusing it, he can actually practice free speech himself rather than instigating others to do the work for him, or alternatively using other's name and work for their own advances. This in itself is a sin against free speech – then again, it is most likely that these people do not actually care so much about free speech as opposed to their own personal or political agenda and grievances.

In other words, seizing on every tiny morsel they can find, blowing up the matter out of water, opportunistically martyring others for their own causes, twisting causes to suit their own agenda.

And the scale of respect that should be afforded to such people on a scale of 0 to 10? -20.

You refers to Instigator for the 1st part and CopyCat for the 2nd