Deleting comments.
Have you guys been to Bolehland.com?
Anyway, I moderate that site and I delete stupid comments which we get everyday. So what’s the beef if I delete comments? I’m finding it hard these days to engage in a quality debate without it spiralling downwards into this spew of personal attacks and seditious statements. So to save my time and my sanity, I delete them.
Of course I don’t randomly delete stuff over there, this bloke who gets on my nerves has a tendency to just advertise his own site with a link to his forum which generates income by diverting our traffic to his. Now I don’t see any money going into my pocket. And not only that, my intelligence is getting insulting from senseless decries that ‘Malaysia is a stupid country’ and ‘here’s how I make money by calling myself a Datuk in cyberspace because I’m actually far too retarded to engage in a logical discussion’.
Seriously. If you hate the country, fine. I don’t really care. My only pet peeve is those who bitch and do nothing about it. And worse, those who have the nerve to condemn those working and trying hard to fix the problem. Sure people take different approaches but I can’t stomach spineless, apathetic condemnation. Above all, I can’t stand people using provocative statements at my site to fish for visitors in order to generate income at theirs. It’s crappy marketing. Usually I won’t give any shit about sites who indulge in rubbish but please don’t use the sites I manage to feed that nonsense.
I’m not hesitant about deleting really mind-numbing comments. Most times, I just leave them in moderation to keep proof of IP address, time and nicknames. So if you plan to lambast me, sure go ahead but if you’re gonna come to my blog and scold my mother, I’m going to play a different ball-game. You will be traced and I won’t let up so easily.
Don’t give me shit about freedom of speech cos I damn well have the ultimate power and freedom over here in my own blog to delete your vitriol. Freedom vs freedom - now that is true democracy! I know we have plenty of stupid people in the world, I simply don’t have the time to engage them.
Come back with some brains, common sense and decent manners, then we’ll talk.
January 28th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
LOL. I wonder who is that guy. Anyway..
> My only pet peeve is those who bitch and do nothing about it. And worse,
> those who have the nerve to condemn those working and trying hard to fix
> the problem.
That’s exactly what got on my nerve not too long ago.
My colleagues were having some conversation on how terrible the government is, corruption, petrol hike, toll hike, etc. So i told them that we are those who can make changes, we can vote, we can make our voice heard.
Then, someone responded me by saying something like “that’s not gonna work.. this is Malaysia”, “don’t waste your time”, etc. So in the end I blasted on her. ;-) Heck, if you don’t care.. shut up; if you care but you are not doing anything, don’t demoralize those who are doing.
yc
January 29th, 2008 at 12:49 am
ssr
when you get pissede, your mes strikes at the heart. continue your good work and may i wish you and nat, an early CNY. best wishes and malaysia needs more people like you and nat. you bet the last dollar, i will give my vote to the right party come this election.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:27 am
lol. I especially like the “Come back with some brains, common sense ….” part. And I doubt he will be doing that for sometime.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
how does this make you different from the governement? you are censoring what you don’t like to see.
to the government, your rallies and marches are mind-numbing if you look at the big picture, because in the end it is not good for our economy, and as such, they refuse permits and beat up participants.
to the government, your blog is counter-productive to the overall running of the country, and as such they will throw you in prison if they wish.
the phrase “to the government” suggests that it is a subjective decision made by a small group of people, or more particularly, the PM.
you deleting comments that you subjectively define as “mind-numbing” is also based on your subjective analysis of the comment.
at the end of the day, the blog is yours. but, the government does have the people’s mandate to run the country, so it is in effect theirs to run.
are you discriminating against those who want their voices to be heard but can’t put it quite as eloquently as you?
that is why people say, the opposition is exactly like the government, but only without the power on such a big scale. in this case, the opposition is controlling a BLOG.
HYPOCRITE.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Erm, that yh *points up* is not me.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Hi Joker,
1. Write your own name.
2. I would delete mind-numbing comments too. Actually, so should our mainstream papers (Khairy, Samy, Nazri, etc) :P
3. I doubt that Li Tsin is discriminating. Complaining comments aren’t alike eloquent writings. Complaints are just complaints. How many of that do we need? I personally get really stressed when I hear people who complain and whine, but when asked to help opposition parties, quickly fold their arms and walk away. They won’t even be polling agents..
4. Joker, if you have a different view of doing things, would you like to help out the opposition parties? Would you like to represent the ones who can’t speak nor write eloquently? Would you like to educate them? Would you like to create awareness?
5. In any case, I don’t see how the oppposition is exactly like the government. They don’t have taxpayers’ money to throw around ;)
January 29th, 2008 at 11:26 am
His motive is LOVE.
Why would he bother to be subjected to your moderation mode wherein other more popular blogs, the moderation does not apply and commenteries are immediately approved/appeared? So, agree?
January 29th, 2008 at 11:30 am
joker: your mother is ugly and you are obviously a piece of shit crap. you’re a fucking hypocrite yourself.
dude, that’s the kind of shit i’m deleting. if you think i should engage such nonsense and equate my moves in ‘censoring’ them with the government, i think you’ve missed the point. call me a hypocrite if you wish, i just want discussions in my own site to remain logical and retain some quality of intellect without hitting below any body’s belt. thanks.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:34 am
harrison: have i ever told you free speech is one this but responsible free speech is another? plus, if you’re referring to malaysia-today, i don’t read the comments. i’m afraid and i dread to even have the idea to have a site like that. but i’m not here to hantam what RPK is doing at his site, i’m only concerned with my own. until and unless all my commenters uses their own names and have a blog for me to engage them with, then i guess moderation will suffice for now. also, remember what happen to nat and his arrest over a comment at his blog? i think many bloggers now take precaution now, especially me.
January 29th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Politikus : “harrison: have i ever told you free speech is one this but responsible free speech is another?”
Harrison: No, you have not told me the aforesaid nor am I aware of your previous/current remarks of such but you have made your point and it’s valid.
Politikus”:plus, if you’re referring to malaysia-today, i don’t read the comments. i’m afraid and i dread to even have the idea to have a site like that. but i’m not here to hantam what RPK is doing at his site, i’m only concerned with my own. until and unless all my commenters uses their own names and have a blog for me to engage them with, then i guess moderation will suffice for now.”
Harrison : No bloggers that I know of is comparable to Mr. “All-Go-Big-Nuts-No-Quits” Raja Petra Kamarudin whom is comparable to “Dirty” Harry Callahan in the “Diry Harry” sequels (if you watch them). At no time have I compare RPK with anyone including you wherein if you or any bloggers lacks the sometimes “reckless” courage, that you guys are infered as cowards. Absolutely not my intent at all. I humbly apologize if I got the “commentator” who sniped you with vulgarities wrong as I am unable to view his commenteries but in regards to the commenter with the handle “joker”, check at your beau’s blog as someone has written “there’s a lot of anti-Anwar propaganda”.
Politikus: “also, remember what happen to nat and his arrest over a comment at his blog? i think many bloggers now take precaution now, especially me”
Harrison: Yes, of course I am aware of (what happened to) Nat having signed the online petion against his illegal detention by the police. AND at no time and at no time of my intent and will that I wanted you to be mired or more accurately persecuted for an ill, trumped up prosecution.
*My commenteries here are bona fide but it may not be perceived in other’s eyes’ as
so.
Thanks.
January 29th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Hi Harrison Bin Handsome!
Now dear, you don’t need to go on the defense. I’m sure we appreciate your debating skills, tearing polytikus point by point. But by doing so, you’re seriously taking the issue out of context and only do yourself the favour of projecting a very petty behaviour. Polytikus was replying based within the context of your “why-subject-to-moderation” comment, which we know (thank you) is bona fide, of course. But surely her reply wasn’t delivered with evil intentions?
And yeah, to save you the hassle of telling us again, we know you did not say polytikus’ reply is mala fide.
Oh, and btw, how do you like my name? Do check out my website, too!
Warmest regards,
Harrison bin Handsome
January 29th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Harrison bin Hansome : Looks like we share the same name.
Harrison bin Han(D)some: No, no, check out the surname…
Harrison bin Hansome : Oh, yeah, Han(D)some, yeah, your father’s name?
Harrison bin Han(D)some: Which one? My mother’s working very “hard” before my birth.
*I wasn’t taking on the lovely tikus. I like her. Now you, don’t tempt me.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:30 am
charlotte:
1. how can you prove that charlotte is your own name? why not go 1 step further and demand that i put down my IC number as well? is charlotte even on your IC or did you name yourself after some HK star?
2. once again, if you are asking the mainstream papers to delete the voice of one party, then you are just as bad. we don’t want the opposition to come in and silence BN. what we want is a party that is FAIR. this is what freedom of speech is. freedom of speech is not about BN giving the opposition a voice when BN forms the govt. it is about WHOEVER is in power giving EVERYBODY a voice.
3. if their view is that they wish to complain, why silence them? why not just ignore them? are they not free to complain? why not express your view that you think their complaining is taking us nowhere?
4. i think i do have a different view of things and although i am quite unclear on what the opposition is standing for at the moment (it just seems as if they are anti-BN), from what i have seen i would NOT like to help them out. and why do you think that those who can’t write or speak eloquently need help? why can’t you accept their arguments in the manner in which they were phrased? the standard is too low for you to understand? if that is the case you should fly back to england as the queen is waiting for you.
5. “but only without the power on such a big scale”. are you blind?
polytikus : so what if someone says that? they have the freedom to say whatever they want? why do you assume that your blog readers must be protected from comments like this? are you afraid that they will draw the wrong conclusions from it? can’t your blog readers read it for themselves and then conclude on their own that it is a dumb comment? are you some sort of big brother protecting them? “logical”, “quality of intellect”, “below any belt” –> by whose standards? YOURS? these are highly subjective terms you are using, mr dictator.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
joker: it appears you are having difficulty in accepting my views simply because they are different from yours. thanks for spending so much time in replying and attacking my approach in life and thanks for all the labels you’ve thrown at me but don’t you think it’s more conducive to discuss issues and solve them rather than nitpicking on … wow, me?
people can do what they want. just not in my blog. i don’t see what harm that causes you or anybody. neither am i imposing my standards (which is obviously subjective because nothing in life is objective, my friend) on anybody. i’m not going to go around saying i’m better than you or that your views are completely pointless. i respect your views and i’m grateful for your time here.
i accept your criticism with humility and our differences with utmost respect. cheers :)
p/s: it’s miss dictator, btw.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Wow…this joker is good.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
LT,
for every one person who disagrees with you, there are 4 others who agrees with you.
i dont care who the hell joker is, but i know you and you know me, and i know what you are fighting for. it seems a lost case at times but believe its well worth it.
we love this country hey, or else you wont be bothered and you would most prolly blog on the weather and on where to find good food in kl:D
keep up the good work, i’ve been mentioning your blogs and nat’s to everyone i know
cheers!
January 30th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
To : Politikus,
You can always appoint me as your attorney. I won’t even charge you satu sen.
January 30th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Joker,
From the sound of it, you, like many of your fellow Msians who frequent this blog, are frustrated and tired with the way how things are now, whether your beef is with the government or the opposition or the fencesitters. Nothing wrong with wanting change for a better, but until you yourself understand what it is that’s making you frustrated, you won’t be able to channel your frustrations into the appropriate directions for the appropriate causes to get the outcome you want. That is the sense I get reading your earlier exchanges with the Tikus (wow, sounds so gangsta lah… ;p) and Charlotte.
Let me make this clear, I am not taking sides with government or opposition in this thread. I believe every Malaysian citizen should be entitled to have fair and unbiased journalism, whether online or in the MSM, and that there should always be room for dissenting views within the realms of civil discourse. In other words, if someone has a different opinion they should have room to express it, and no one should have the right to limit their voices or access to their voices. But I also feel strongly that dissenting views should be guided by civil discourse. In other words, anyone is free to disagree with my opinions, but please don’t insult my ancestors or question whether my genes are of canine origin, because if they have a weak argument to begin with, ad hominum attacks will not help. I think this is in essence what the Tikus is saying.
“to the government, your rallies and marches are mind-numbing if you look at the big picture, because in the end it is not good for our economy, and as such, they refuse permits and beat up participants.”
Umm, no, that’s what the government would like you to believe, that all the recent protests are opposition manipulations to create dissent. I put it to you that it was grassroots dissent in the first place that lead to the creation and growth of many of these protests. Look at the Protes rally where people were protesting against the rising cost of living while wages have stayed relatively unchanged, then looked at the heavy-handed police response. It’s clear that the reason the police were behaving in such a manner was to repress dissent rather than to maintain the peace and protect the economy. Think about it.
“you deleting comments that you subjectively define as “mind-numbing” is also based on your subjective analysis of the comment….are you discriminating against those who want their voices to be heard but can’t put it quite as eloquently as you?
that is why people say, the opposition is exactly like the government, but only without the power on such a big scale. in this case, the opposition is controlling a BLOG. ”
There is a huge difference between Li Tsin censoring her blog and the government censoring mainstream media, that is the level of access for and given to alternative opinions. It’s easy to access other opinions and blogs that don’t agree with the Tikus’ point of view. Just search through Google or read the replies of some of her blog visitors. It’s easier online for people to get their views heard through replies, links and comments. Even if the Tikus tried, she cannot limit people’s access to these opposing views simply because this is the nature of the internet. Compare that with the type of censorship we see on the MSM. The MSM currently doesn’t allow for points of view unfavourable to the government to be heard. Dissenting voices never get equal “air-time” whether it’s from the rakyat or opposition. Just read the letters section of the NST and the Star and you’ll see they only post letters from readers that agree with the BN line (see for example, the reader response after Chua Soi Lek’s resignation).
“at the end of the day, the blog is yours. but, the government does have the people’s mandate to run the country, so it is in effect theirs to run.”
I have no problems with BN running the country if they truly have been given a fair and just mandate. But I don’t think they have managed to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have. But that’s my beef with them. Others may not share my opinion.
I do agree with you that people should be allowed to judge for themselves what they want. I believe that in order to do that, they need to have the best access possible to information. The problem is that, I don’t think the majority of people have that in Malaysia right now, at least the majority of them who don’t have access to the internet.
January 30th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Joker:
The government should not restrict freedom of speech. Individuals and entities should be likewise free to restrict speech on their private property. There is no right to take my webspace, my column inches or my living room to devote it to your own views. If you want to be consistent, I hope you don’t mind my barging into your living room to hold a ceramah one of these days.
January 30th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
hey tikus, I’ve seen some of the comments on the Bolehland which were simply worthless and unconstructive, not worth the space they take up. so chill and good job on what you’re doing.
January 31st, 2008 at 1:57 am
Dear Elanor/No 18
I think with your counter-commenteries, you have almost beaten “joker” to a pulp. I am free for anyone.
January 31st, 2008 at 10:41 am
thinking:
what makes you think i am frustrated? i am just presenting an alternative view. why must you make it seem like i am frustrated to enhance your point? do i try to guess what you are feeling from your comments?
how can you say you are not taking sides when your comments are so clearly biased? we are talking about 1 blog here. polytikus.com. you can’t say that the whole mainstream media is controlled by the govt, and as such the dissenting voices in the mainstream media are drowned out. what about harakah? if more people wanted to read the opposition’s propaganda, i think this paper will be more widely distributed, and might even qualify to be termed as part of the mainstream media.
“In other words, if someone has a different opinion they should have room to express it, and no one should have the right to limit their voices or access to their voices. But I also feel strongly that dissenting views should be guided by civil discourse. In other words, anyone is free to disagree with my opinions, but please don’t insult my ancestors or question whether my genes are of canine origin, because if they have a weak argument to begin with, ad hominum attacks will not help.”
Exactly! most people do feel this way. i, like many, agree with you that a personal attack is the sign of a poor argument. but so is saying things like “calm down” or “you are getting personal” (when one isn’t) or “don’t get frustrated”. stick to replying on point and then the true strength of your argument can be tested.
anyway back to my point, as you said, dissenting views should be guided by civil discourse, and that is true. but you have failed to tell me why polytikus has to censor these comments. you are one of her readers. in your personal opinion, the personal attacks are the sign of a weak argument, which of course is counter-productive to the person making the attack. then why censor? cant polytikus see how smart her readers are?
“Umm, no, that’s what the government would like you to believe, that all the recent protests are opposition manipulations to create dissent. I put it to you that it was grassroots dissent in the first place that lead to the creation and growth of many of these protests.”
this is your opinion. there is no way for you to prove this. just as it is some peoples’ opinions that the government is protecting the economy. i am not saying that i agree with the government, i am just presenting an argument to show the subjectiveness of this whole thing, and how any form of censorship is based on one’s subjective opinions. as such, i re-iterate my point : censorship is only necessary if you think your audience lacks the mental capacity to draw their own proper conclusions from the comment.
“There is a huge difference between Li Tsin censoring her blog and the government censoring mainstream media, that is the level of access for and given to alternative opinions.”
yes there is a huge difference. however, what happens when (IF) the opposition comes into power? won’t they then control the mainstream media? all i have to gauge/predict what will happen then, is by looking at what is happening now, albeit on a much, much smaller scale. hence, being exactly alike.
your argument that we can google other sites for news doesn’t hold much water. we are not talking about other sites. we are talking about polytikus.com, and about how there is censorship here. i put it to you that all of the comments polytikus deleted have been unfavourable to her. now that is a fact that can be proved.
“The MSM currently doesn’t allow for points of view unfavourable to the government to be heard. Dissenting voices never get equal “air-time” whether it’s from the rakyat or opposition.”
are you saying that opposition voices are totally drowned out or that they are partially drowned out? those 2 lines seem to be conflicting.
“I have no problems with BN running the country if they truly have been given a fair and just mandate. But I don’t think they have managed to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have. But that’s my beef with them. Others may not share my opinion.”
can you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have NOT been given a fair and just mandate? the elections have been won, and if you wish to contest it the burden of proof should be on you. and since you are setting the standard at “beyond a shadow of a doubt”, should you not be able to prove your point by the same standards?
once again, i have to remind everyone, i can see how my above paragraph can be perceived as pro-bn, but it is not. it is just an argument i am using to rebut the points made. my main point being made here is about censorship.
“I do agree with you that people should be allowed to judge for themselves what they want. I believe that in order to do that, they need to have the best access possible to information. The problem is that, I don’t think the majority of people have that in Malaysia right now, at least the majority of them who don’t have access to the internet.”
hmm did i say that? i think i said that people should be able to draw their own conclusions from the comments. hmm
johnleemk:
is the mainstream media now not private owned? did a major takeover happen while i was asleep last night?
i am not saying that polytikus should let me write my own entries on her blog. i am saying, that, if she is holding a ceramah in her living room, and it is open to all, then she should not silence certain people. now that is an accurate analogy. understand?
*must resist urge to make personal attack for fear of deletion*
January 31st, 2008 at 11:56 am
joker: with all due respect and sincerity, how much time have you spent writing all these comments?
i’m finalising a painfully long document that speaks to some of your concerns re: the opposition and what not, it’ll prob be on bolehland.com soon.
in the meantime: engaging in constructive criticism is laudable, we all need some, but at some point, it becomes nitpicking.
would you really have a website with absolutely no moderation? if *actually* seditious, defamatory, inciteful, etc statements are posted on your website, what happens then?
and there is a bit of apples and oranges here. we’re not talking about gov’t bodies or institutions like the media.
polytikus.com is…. polytikus.com! does it sound like something that needs to be accountable to the public, to you, to me, or to santa claus?
to each their own. lt has her policies for her blog, i have mine for mine, and you can have yours for yours. it is a personal space, that offers personal views on public affairs - that doesn’t mean it must be subject to standards x or y.
but again, how much time am *i* spending on this?
if we want a better malaysia, will you really achieve it by cucuking and cucuking oppositionists & activists who are far from perfect, but trying pretty hard?
or will you achieve it by forwarding some basic information, printing and giving out some leaflets, talking to people about what’s happening in malaysia?
i really have to get back to work. apologies in advance if it does not seem time efficient to engage at length hereafter. it’s not that i don’t want to bro, but there are pressing matters at hand :(
again, full article on bolehland.com soon.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:07 pm
i will most certainly censor any ceramah participant who will start yelling profanities at me without contributing anything remotely constructive to the discussion, yes. and if you have a problem with that, you obviously haven’t been to a ceramah or neither do you own a blog.
this blog censors comments who have little to no value to a discussion and those bordering on sedition and defamation. roar.
for a person with such major concerns over how i manage my own blog, you sure picked a suitable handle, joker.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:15 pm
As usual, a boyfriend will always defend his truly. I really wanna meet you (Politikus) and Nat Tan one day. I personally think Politikus may have been a good (investigative) journalist, but as a person, realistically based on her art of arguments here. IT’s piss-poor!
I hate to be engage in a relationship. The last time my gf’s a harridan. I hate doin earsquats.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Now Nat may be good in dialectics and commanded quite a high IQ. But talking about persona and psychological stamina, I think he’s frail.
One time I was complaining to the police about a cretain case for almost 7 hours I compare brain pains with the Investigating Officer. He asked me is it OK for him to ‘puff”, I mean smoke, I say “NO” and winnowing any washroom retention until he asked my permission for breaks. I should have been a policeman.
*I wasn’t charge for any criminal nor commercial offence.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:25 pm
damn. snipers with multiple nicknames.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
No.No.No. You Got me wrong or at least to say half wrong. Note that I have never change my e-mail so the blog owner will recognised me. It was meant for other commenters. Does my handle matter that my commenteries/points?
Politikus, while I share my admiration for your good reportage, I share equally your naivette in understanding matters.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:48 pm
why waste my time defending myself when i can impart some knowledge:
In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgement. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.
:)
January 31st, 2008 at 1:34 pm
POLIKLINIK opined:
—————-
why waste my time defending myself when i can impart some knowledge:
In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgement. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.
:) unevolved (laughing) smiley
———————————–
Nikolai Volkov : Having read your commeteries whether it was derected at anyone in particular or in gereral, you point is paltitudinal and a very common understanding. however I reserved the bottom lines for elucidations-
“But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.”—POLIKLINIK
Nikolai : Are you talking about Mahathir Mohamad? He was once a tyrant who respects no (universal) democracy and having hand-picked Abdullah Badawi whom he probably viewed as lame as serving him (Mahathir’s) purposes such as to complete the tacit Causeway Bridge linking Johor to s’pore after his retirement has been supplanted by “The Inskandar Project’?
Now Malaysiakini reports that Mahathir was charging voters to vote out “DEADWOOD” leaders? Having known Abdullah Badawi for many years, Mahathir clearly knows Badawi’s submisiveness to Najib’s dominance in commanding matters. Why would Mahathir chose Badawi and wants to dethrone him(Badawi) for Najib?
And why would the opposition parties as well as Malaysiakini so enthused in this?
Now, was it because Malaysiakini.com and the opposition parties are using Mahathir as a influential frontliner? If that’s the case, good stategy. Hitler was dumb to take on both super-powers, he should have incited them to fight one another then snake his way in for an easy kill.
Terima Ka$ih to Mahathir and Badawi for year$ of your$’ $ervice$.
Yours sincerely,
Nikolai Volkov
Russian Expat in Malaysia.
January 31st, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I opined that probably half of the world population is either raving mad or in-between sanity. While half of the balance 50% actually feels strongly that the raving or near-raving mad people should have equal access to uncensored vocal representation. Now if you were to delete the raving or near raving mad comments…then you are down to only 25% of the population who are still with you. Of which, probably only 17.5% will strongly support your decision. The way I see it….it is not politically correct to delete any form of voices. But if you are not into politics, then hell, this blog is your throne and you are the god. That is why, the Malaysia bloggosphere still do not have a political hero, perhaps except for RPK if he decides to stand for election. Please don’t think I am chiding you; to me, the Joker is good and he/she has a good joke here. And so far, you are not doing badly yourself, except for that ‘your …is ugly’…lol. I am no hero, neither; probably in the near raving mad category. But do carry on this conversation with no malice towards each other. :)
Quote: “Come back with some brains, common sense and decent manners, then we’ll talk.”
January 31st, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Joker
After reading your reply, I had to go back and re-read all the earlier posts, especially those made by you because it seemed like a case of chicken-duck talk, lol.
“what makes you think i am frustrated? i am just presenting an alternative view. why must you make it seem like i am frustrated to enhance your point? do i try to guess what you are feeling from your comments?”
I thought made it clear from the beginning that what I wrote was my opinion. I definitely did not intend to presume to speak on your behalf, much less for the purpose of enhancing my argument. I’m not here to persuade anyone, mostly to educate myself on current issues and to present my views when I feel the need to.
So, in the same way you came to the conclusion that I am biased against BN, that is the same way I conclude you are somebody who’s frustrated. So frustrated that you have to punctuate your replies with unnecessary name-calling and personal insinuations. Is that a fair enough assumption for me to make?
For someone professing to be so passionate about freedom of expression, civil discourse, and letting readers decide for themselves on the merits of the replies, you certainly seem to resort quite often to name-calling and personal insults in your arguments. I don’t know about you, but if I was trying to engage someone in a constructive discussion, I certainly wouldn’t start by behaving defensively or engage in insulting name-calling. That’s just plain rude. It’s up to the host blogger whether they want to put up with this type of thing. Politikus’s already made it clear that all views are welcomed to but to keep it civil. The fact that she’s allowed your posts calling her and other respondents in this thread who happen to agree with her blog house rules, “hypocrite”, “blind”, “dictator” and many other such lovely uncalled-for and unjustified descriptions says a lot about her. And about you.
There are a number of your points which I would like to reply to but as it is, I have a deadline to meet and I won’t have time to craft a decent rebuttal, much less read blogs until next week. So I’ll leave it here for now and a parting statement for you to chew on (or flame!):
As bloggers and commentators and due to the limitations of electronic media, our words may not paint the full picture of our opinions, but the way how we say them and how we respond to people’s comments can certainly give those people an idea of what type of opinion we are likely to have.
Peace to all.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Hey Joker.
1. I don’t know about a HK star named Charlotte.
If you still think I gave it to myself, heck, I can give you my IC number and you can check on SPR. This is amusing.
2. You obviously didn’t catch my joke. Hehehe.
3. Because we’ve had enough complaints about the government. And it’s Li Tsin’s personal blog. She doesn’t wanna publish complaints, so what? It’s not like she’s controlling The Star (though I wouldn’t mind if she is).
4. Opposition parties and NGOs are not just anti-BN. They are anti-corruption and anti-cronyism. If BN didn’t have those two major elements, I’ll be shaking my legs and using my weekends and annual leave resting or going on holidays (I applied for leave on Thurday to attend DSAI’s talk at SFX :))
Speaking and writing eloquenetly? Why, would you like to have more citizens talking like machais? Is that a party that you’d like to back?
And again, I’d like words followed by action. How can complaints alone be fruitful? Would you like to have your partner/future partner constantly complaining and whining to you?
Why would the queen be waiting for me? Hahahaha! This is so funny.
Btw, it’s funny how The Star reported that Charles Santiago has joined DAP (and indirectly called him a kuching kurap), but why wasn’t the news about Edward Lee joining DAP reported? It was the same press conference. They both were there on Friday.
Would it have been different if Edward had joined MCA? I’m pretty sure more print space would’ve been given. Hrmmmmmm.
Don’t know who’s Edward Lee? Google “Edward Lee PJ APPAC”.
This is what I think. If you’re sitting on the fence and see flaws in opposition parties, approach them and help in whatever capacity. And yes, there are flaws, but it can’t be fixed if all those sitting on the fence keep whining, can it?’
Doodeedoo