Ox Mush a lackey, misguided individual, attention seeking?
-
some of the people here are so cute ...
-
his views might be very different...
but still...
those are his opinions... -
Well, if you benefit from the system, you'd not be easily motivated to bite the hand that feeds you doesn't it.Originally posted by zenden9:His view is abnormal,so fake! Totally irrational for a ordinary spore.
Those who read that Mushroom post,knows what I mean! Whatever PAP implement,he will say good and never question or give negative view of it. NO Sane ordinary Sporean will do that!
We all have agendas. That's the reality of life. If we disagree, let's have a frank discussion, not a top-down approach. That, ironically, is too close to the MIW in one sense or the other. -
HOw does GST,Public transport,ERP hike benefits him? He likes to pay more? Unless he is minister himself.... He will not hesitate to say all these is good! LOL!! There must be also a good reason for hike,so far all those excuses r not convincing..Originally posted by LazerLordz:Well, if you benefit from the system, you'd not be easily motivated to bite the hand that feeds you doesn't it.
We all have agendas. That's the reality of life. If we disagree, let's have a frank discussion, not a top-down approach. That, ironically, is too close to the MIW in one sense or the other. -
Eh, sometimes it's subconscious support...Originally posted by zenden9:HOw does GST,Public transport,ERP hike benefits him? He likes to pay more? Unless he is minister himself.... He will not hesitate to say all these is good! LOL!! There must be also a good reason for hike,so far all those excuses r not convincing..
If you find that it's utter crap, don't get sucked into it lah. -
Ok..Crap him!Originally posted by LazerLordz:Eh, sometimes it's subconscious support...
If you find that it's utter crap, don't get sucked into it lah.
-
I am opposed to either sides of political parties putting propaganda on discussion groups.Originally posted by Fatum:ah ... an interesting view ....
so do you think it's proper for declared members of the opposition to air their views here then ? .... -
I think there is a difference if you are a gay and you say someone is handsome; and you are a heterosexual and you say someone is handsome.Originally posted by mystiv:ahh..when someone is in support of the government, he is a lackey..
so i guess when i comment that someone is handsome, im a gay, yeah?
and therefore when i think that Nokia products are better than Samsung products, im an employee under Nokia, i guess..
so this is how some matured intellectuals think..i see...
thanks for the enlightenment
In the former you are already biased towards the sex even before you can make the judgement.
If you are working for Nokia, won't it further your purpose if you claim that Nokia is a better product as compared to another product. As opposed to a man on the street who claims that Nokia is a better phone, the man on the street has no benefits from making that claim. -
Uh-huh.Originally posted by maurizio13:If you are working for Nokia, won't it further your purpose if you claim that Nokia is a better product as compared to another product. As opposed to a man on the street who claims that Nokia is a better phone, the man on the street has no benefits from making that claim.
So if I claim that my Sony Ericsson phone is great, then your conclusion is that I must be working for SE since it otherwise wouldn't benefit me to make that claim.
Gosh, I love my SE phone. And I'm still studying - I don't work for any company. So I can't tell others about the wonders of my SE phone just because it doesn't benefit me and I don't work for them?
I must say that I find your line of thought pretty interesting.
-
Main Entry: dis·cus·sion
Pronunciation: di-'sk&-sh&n
Function: noun
1 : consideration of a question in open and usually informal debate
2 : a formal treatment of a topic in speech or writing
Main Entry: con·sid·er·ation
Pronunciation: k&n-"si-d&-'rA-sh&n
Function: noun
1 : continuous and careful thought
2 a : a matter weighed or taken into account when formulating an opinion or plan b : a taking into account
3 : thoughtful and sympathetic regard
4 : an opinion obtained by reflection
5 : ESTEEM, REGARD
6 a : RECOMPENSE, PAYMENT b : the inducement to a contract or other legal transaction; specifically : an act or forbearance or the promise thereof done or given by one party in return for the act or promise of another
- in consideration of : as payment or recompense for
If you have both a group of jury and a judge insisting that the accused is guilty. Why bother to have a trial in the first place? (They were already tainted before the trial.) -
Please read my post again carefully.Originally posted by fudgester:Uh-huh.
So if I claim that my Sony Ericsson phone is great, then your conclusion is that I must be working for SE since it otherwise wouldn't benefit me to make that claim.
Gosh, I love my SE phone. And I'm still studying - I don't work for any company. So I can't tell others about the wonders of my SE phone just because it doesn't benefit me and I don't work for them?
I must say that I find your line of thought pretty interesting.
Since when I say that if you claim your Sony Ericsson phone is great, then I conclude that you are working for Sony Ericsson.
I said there is a difference if you work for Sony Ericsson and claim the phone is great; and if you are a student and claim that Sony Ericsson is great.
So if you claim that you are a student and your Sony Ericsson phone is good, it must be an unbiased view. As opposed to someone working for Sony Ericsson claiming the phone is great. -
Right, so if we praise one platform over the other, does it make us automatic members of a particular party? That is your assumption here.
Your reasoning is circular and leads nowhere. -
Yes, I've read your post carefully. Let's re-examine it carefully:Originally posted by maurizio13:Please read my post again carefully.
Since when I say that if you claim your Sony Ericsson phone is great, then I conclude that you are working for Sony Ericsson.
I said there is a difference if you work for Sony Ericsson and claim the phone is great; and if you are a student and claim that Sony Ericsson is great.
So if you claim that you are a student and your Sony Ericsson phone is good, it must be an unbiased view. As opposed to someone working for Sony Ericsson claiming the phone is great.
You said that if a man works for Nokia, he will say that Nokia phones are good since it will further his purpose. In the next sentence, all you said was that a man on the street who claims that Nokia is better derives no benefits from doing so.
If you are working for Nokia, won't it further your purpose if you claim that Nokia is a better product as compared to another product. As opposed to a man on the street who claims that Nokia is a better phone, the man on the street has no benefits from making that claim.
You didn't say anything about the latter's views being unbiased. So I interpreted you as saying that the man on the street can't possibly be making such a claim since it doesn't benefit him in any way - carrying the reasoning forward from the previous sentence.
This is what happens when you're vague. You get misunderstood. I can't be held responsible if you don't properly flesh out what goes through your mind, eh? -
I didn't say that if you choose one party over the other, it makes you an automatic member of a party. There was no assumption on my part. That's why I posted the topic for discussion. "Ox Mush a lackey, misguided individual, attention seeking?"Originally posted by LazerLordz:Right, so if we praise one platform over the other, does it make us automatic members of a particular party? That is your assumption here.
Your reasoning is circular and leads nowhere.
It depends on his degree of proximity to the party; say if he is a minister; do you think you are having a discussion; or you are just being fed propaganda.
Say he is a minister, you won't be having a discussion, because his views won't change, you are just being fed propaganda. It won't be a discussion, it's just a propaganda session. -
propangada or the truth..
It all depends on which you want to believe in. Even if he is pro gahmen which i'm sure he is one, it doesn;t necessarily mean we should all gang up and start throwing personal insults, that would make us no difference from the MIW..
because we are different so hes all free to promote whatever proganda he wants to, the important thing is whether you believe in it or not..
-
Enough of the personal libel, I don't like it when people bash each other for their views.
-
The threadstarter has just proven that Singapore is right not to relax censorship laws and strict controls on political discourse.
The internet is an open and effective tool for propagation of all sorts of opinions. With critics of the government being immature and prone to insults and personal attacks as this and other forumners show themselves to be, how can any responsible government allow unfettered comments in the public sphere?
The ruling party is being very tolerant as it is, not coming down hard on groundless allegations and defamatory remarks in Sgforums, although the owner of the site is liable for all such remarks posted here. It is for that reason that the WP leadership has decided to impose rules on their members posting on internet forums. They simply cannot (as past experience confirms) be certain that members of the WP will be disciplined enough not to give the party a bad name and render them liable for prosecution.
The government has been criticized for not allowing greater political freedom, but it is the critics that most strenuously seek to muzzle any views that do not agree with them.
People like the threadstarter has just proven my point time and again: Singapore is not ready for western-style democracy. -
Let's not get carried away here, OM. It's obvious that many, if not most of the people who have responded in this thread take a different view from that of the threadstarter. Your post serves to prove the threadstarter right as much as his served to prove you right.
-
Wah piang! You all so cute sia.
PAP dun allow us to talk about sensitive issue on mainstream media, then we found internet as a new medium to express our views. When someone sides with the ruling party, then you guys object like siao, really dunno wat you guys want sia. -
wow i thought the threadstarter was something.. but your reply is just bout as same as what the threadstarter is doing or wanted to do, to see what kind of response you would have, unfortunately...you probably you fell right into his trap...Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The threadstarter has just proven that Singapore is right not to relax censorship laws and strict controls on political discourse.
The internet is an open and effective tool for propagation of all sorts of opinions. With critics of the government being immature and prone to insults and personal attacks as this and other forumners show themselves to be, how can any responsible government allow unfettered comments in the public sphere?
The ruling party is being very tolerant as it is, not coming down hard on groundless allegations and defamatory remarks in Sgforums, although the owner of the site is liable for all such remarks posted here. It is for that reason that the WP leadership has decided to impose rules on their members posting on internet forums. They simply cannot (as past experience confirms) be certain that members of the WP will be disciplined enough not to give the party a bad name and render them liable for prosecution.
The government has been criticized for not allowing greater political freedom, but it is the critics that most strenuously seek to muzzle any views that do not agree with them.
People like the threadstarter has just proven my point time and again: Singapore is not ready for western-style democracy.
"The ruling party is being very tolerant as it is, not coming down hard on groundless allegations and defamatory remarks in Sgforums, although the owner of the site is liable for all such remarks posted here" ??
So is this some kind of a threat against anyone who who is not with the gahmen??
and you said you are studying in oxford..i would have expected better from you.. tsk..tsk.. getting so emotional..
-
Which is why we ignore the extremist views here, establishment or otherwise.
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Wrong.
The threadstarter has just proven that Singapore is right not to relax censorship laws and strict controls on political discourse.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Wrong again. You are just as prone to immaturity as your post has shown.
The internet is an open and effective tool for propagation of all sorts of opinions. With critics of the government being immature and prone to insults and personal attacks as this and other forumners show themselves to be, how can any responsible government allow unfettered comments in the public sphere?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Please do check out the young pap forums.
The ruling party is being very tolerant as it is, not coming down hard on groundless allegations and defamatory remarks in Sgforums, although the owner of the site is liable for all such remarks posted here. It is for that reason that the WP leadership has decided to impose rules on their members posting on internet forums. They simply cannot (as past experience confirms) be certain that members of the WP will be disciplined enough not to give the party a bad name and render them liable for prosecution.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
It seems that you have proven your own point? (on your own)
The government has been criticized for not allowing greater political freedom, but it is the critics that most strenuously seek to muzzle any views that do not agree with them.
People like the threadstarter has just proven my point time and again: Singapore is not ready for western-style democracy. -
Which is why the government is right to come down hard on defamatory remarks in the public domain. Now those without the guts to put their face and name on the line choose to shoot behind the shield of anonymity here.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Which is why we ignore the extremist views here, establishment or otherwise.
It doesn't matter...ostriches will remain ostriches, fools will remain fools. As long as the majority of Singaporeans can think straight, the right people will continue to rule whilst misfits will continue to rant. -
Firstly maurizio13, no personal attacks.... you have something against OM, please PM him.
Next OM...do not try to message the moderators and gloat them into action by saying that they have no teeth. The moderators do NOT GET PAID for their work here and we are not moderating this place 24/7. We need a break as well. If you want us to mediate, ask in a proper manner.
This thread has no political significance. I am closing it. Please start threads wisely in the future.