Commentary – Sharing an opinion on the Internet
Written on Jul 05 09 // Rants.
It was an innocuous question posted on Plurk by Vandalin:
You see a man and woman arguing on the street, and the guy starts grabbing the girl and shaking her around. Step in / don’t step in?
It was my basic assumption from the question that the two are in a relationship. As such, I had posted my reply that I will not step in. My participation in that plurk would have been just that much, until I decided I should explain my reasons for not stepping in (perhaps more than once) – People have to live with the consequences of their choices. The girl would have to live with the consequences of her choice of the guy. Since she has chosen this guy, this is part of the package. Among the responses to the Plurk, there was another person who also took a similar stand as mine (though without being as detailed in her response) and yet got no flak at all while two other people also mentioned they would not intervene, with one jokingly suggested that the couple may just be doing this deliberately for some reasons. Why my rather thoughtless comment created a maelstrom which soon I get sucked for I really have no idea. I can’t help but feel I was picked on and singled out, after I was subsequently told by a friend that the entire group of them were already acquainted with one another from the However, I must admit I did not expect the comment not to sit well with some female plurkers. I should have expected it since my female friends would have expect me to offer help if they are in that situation. However, there is a distinct difference between friends and strangers. Either way, one particular female plurker who objected to my reasons simply said she had expected that I should help because I can, regardless of how silly or stupid it will make me look. I am expected to act right there and then because I won’t get a second chance – if something happens. She strongly objected to my stand that it was her own problem and no one should do anything based on the ‘conditions’ (or available information) stated in the original question. The other female Plurker thought it was appalling that there are still people who believed like I did. (When was the last time she got out to the real world?) It was then alluded that I am the kind who felt that if a woman is violated, I would blame her for wearing a short skirt or exposing clothing. It was an amazing and insane extrapolation from a comment I had made, and yet they could not, and obviously has not, done the same for the situation described in the question. For e.g.already once notorious Cowboy Bar – which at some point in the past was an online wretched hive of scum and villainy. But if you asked how I felt about the entire event, it was like I had stepped on some dog poo and then the dog poo ensured I was engulfed in a foul stench for the entire duration it stuck to me.
- – the girl might be a shop lifter, the shopkeeper caught up with her and so he turned her around and in his rage shakes her, demanding to know where she had hid the item; or
- – the guy could be a brother, the girl is on high on drugs. Desperate, the brother was turning her and shaking her to try and wake her up; or
- – the guy was begging the girl not to leave him after she made the decision to break up; or
- – the girl could be a prostitute who stole the money of her client while he was showering, and the guy is now confronting her after he caught up with her.
It also doesn’t matter that some women will not leave some scum even after repeatedly hurt. Granted we’ll never know what is going on unless we asked, but I was answering a question based on the known conditions. As far as I am concerned, if it happens in the public the girl will call for help if it is needed. When she hasn’t or wouldn’t call for help – even when I give the guy a stare for his obviously ungentlemanly actions – then it warranted no further action until some form of physical violence has occurred, for e.g. slapping, or the throwing of a punch. It was also an indication that she could handle it alone. On top of which if she doesn’t know how to shake the guy lose and seek help, then it was obvious to me that she didn’t need it. If there are other guys who believed it warranted action, that is fine by me, and everyone is free to choose whether to help or not. The exchange with these two female plurkers isn’t bad at all, after all their objection was understandable. It was the comments of some of those who joined later, and start poking fire with nothing meaningful to contribute to the exchange other than to throw insults and comments meant to pick a fight that was the real nuisance. What transpired in that plurk (and some other online arguments) reminded me once again that to local netizens just expressing their objection is not enough, they want to deny me my views completely. While doing so they also expect my complete submission no matter what my reasons and justifications to my views were. The more I say, the more they can expand on it to ‘justify and confirm’ the superiority of their stand, their self-righteousness and their pre-conceived low opinion of me simply because I do not share their views, and will not do what they think is the right thing to do. Perhaps it has got something to do with our education system Such occurrences, makes me wonder at time whether it is worth it at all to share an opinion online since some people apparently allows no different opinion other than their own simply because they think your opinion is stupid or unacceptable. It doesn’t matter they weren’t the one who asked for opinions in the first place, and no one has even cared to object to them. It also suggests to me why online opinion can be so single-sided against our It was simply nothing more of an exercise of ‘conform or die’. For my entire life, I have never backed down from a**holes like these and I always choose to go down fighting even in spite of whatever names and labels they can conceive. The irony is that they wouldn’t even see themselves as some kind of cyberspace terrorists while they were enjoying their cyber-bullying. Of course, knowing that they could take things as far as they can without any real life repercussions, embolden some of these trolls to be as nasty as they could. Until the day their real life and identity gets splashed all over the Internet with their online action tied to it, will these online cowards finally know fear. It once again reminds me why the gahmen has never held Internet opinion with in high regard. Our elected leaders may have been elitist, but rightfully so, after looking at the very childish behavior of some of the netizens, such as those I have encountered above.government gahmen while election results – even in Single Member Constituencies – turned out drastically different: pro-gahmen or even neutral opinions are simply shouted down and drowned out until those who shared them can’t be bothered anymore.
Tags: None
chillycraps
Jul 05, 2009, 16:30I totally feel you.
That is the reason why I always look at my friend’s friends when deciding how to behave / react to the friend.
However, the immaturity of some netizens and their inability to participate in intellectual discussion, should not deter us from presenting our cases. Just tell the peanut brains to talk to your hand while you continue with constructive conversation with those who can make better use of their right (and left) hand.
chillycraps´s last blog ..at the crossroad
2009-07-5 @ 18:08
In general just keep one’s own counsel until he is clear more or less who are the participants, and what is their general intelligence level. There is no use for Aristotle to participate in a discussion among village idiots, though not that I assume that I am Aristotle’s equal!
Either way what transpired revealed that a little hypocrite has never changed its spots. Appropriate action has been taken. There is no need for declaration of war or hostile actions. All diplomatic channels will be closed and the next overt hostile action will be dealt with – decisively and without remorse.
s
Jul 05, 2009, 21:59you totally misconstrued everything.
by the way, yes i do know some of the others who participated in the plurk, but far be it for me to ‘take sides’ just because they are my friends/acquaintances. had i not taken issue with your blased attitude and some of the very offending comments you have made, i wouldn’t even have bothered to comment in the plurk.
about the ‘childish behaviour’ you mentioned, i hope that does not include everyone who have commented on the plurk. some of the people have tried engaging you in a INTELLECTUAL discussion of differing views civilly.
2009-07-5 @ 23:30
Let me repeat: I agreed as much with you that my comment was thoughtless and basically ‘politically incorrect’ when you take issue of it. In short we have no disagreement on that part.
What we do disagree with is, my choice of action. However, the plurk was a question on what one’s action would be and it was never a debate whether that choice of action was right or wrong. If you disagree with my choice for not helping, I noted your objection and so be it. What else do you want? It appalls me greatly that agreeing to disagree is NOT an option, and the only option was for me to submit to your opinion. There’s really nothing intellectual in you stating your disagreement. Expecting me to submit to your views when I have made my stand clear is HARDLY civil. I beg to differ there was anything marginally considered as an attempt to ‘engage in an intellectual discussion of differing views civilly’ in our disagreement. We simply stated our disagreement and then stood on our point of view steadfastly.
Beyond the responses from the two of you, the rest of the remarks from your acquaintances were hardly helpful, civil or intellectual, though I would admit perhaps our opinion on what is civil and intellectual would differ as well. In my opinion much of the rest of the comments in that plurk were no better than the insults worthy of the soccer fan who deserved Eric Cantona’s Kungfu kick.
Pip
Jul 06, 2009, 15:30Just read the plurk,
From what I can read there, Lycan has given an honest answer of what he thinks he’ll do, without an holier-than-thou attitude. All of his replies were objective and civil. I think only 1 person was using vulgarities and calling people names…I don’t plurk, so I am not sure if others have posted vulgarities as well and have subsequently deleted them. However, it does look like people are picking on Lycan, much like people picking on another blogger that wouldn’t give up her MRT seat. Different people have different opinions. It’s pretty interesting to see what people think. You may not agree with the other person, but when you start dissing someone else, you have already lost the argument.
Regarding the subject of whether 1 should step in or not, honestly, I’m not sure what I’d do until I can actually see what the situation is. To feel strongly about something and declare that you would do one thing now doesn’t mean you’d do it when the situation arises, because when you declared it, that statement was made in a vacuum devoid of other environment variables. Eg: You are drunk and look more like a robber than a helpful stranger. I have done both before when faced with quarelling couples. Mostly, I tend to walk away without feeeling a need to intervene – there was only once where I stepped in – when a guy forcefully shoved his girlfriend out of the train (while alighting at the MRT station, not when the train was still moving).
I have been raised on a staple of motherly advice that goes along the lines of “if you see people fighting or quarrelling, just walk away” and “人多的地方不要去” etc. Weird thing is, the same person that gave me that nagging advice – my mom, made me learn martial arts when I was 10.
Weighing against that, there were situations where I was helped by strangers after being accosted by some ruffians (read: 1 ah beng kenna from other ah bengs, and another ah beng from out of no where come and help). So I know 1st hand how welcome that unlooked for help was.
Still, it’s down to judgement calls on whether I intervene. And I review my decisions even after making them, it will help me make better judgements next time since I don’t have to evaluate everything again.
For those that are still wondering about greasemonkey, it’s an add-in for firefox that allows you to run scripts and can modify how webpages look. You can write your own scripts for greasemoneky or find 1 that suits your needs from the script libraries on the net.
Vandalin
Jul 06, 2009, 15:45everyone has a right to express their opinions online. that’s what makes internet great.
One thing bugs me about this entry though. Why judge the entire cowboy bar by the actions of a few? A strong caution against generalization, as, in 99% of the time, it gives an opening for rebuttal, and it is usually WRONG.
2009-07-6 @ 16:03
I made the comment with the thought that if the person did not consider himself to be a villain and/or a scum, there will be no need to respond to groundless allegations. If not, he will write a blog post as a response.
So far, the lack of response from most of the denizens of the Cowboy Bar (with the exception of one which I noticed) suggest that my generalization is indeed IN ERROR. And as long as this condition persists, I will stand corrected for my comment.
However, that being said, the quality of the rebuttals that exists would be an example of its writer’s individual maturity level.
Let me add, technically what you are and who you are cannot be defined by a mere few words I used. But if a person chooses to get really worked up over it, it does also reflect on his maturity, or the lack of it, doesn’t it?
Nerak
Jul 06, 2009, 18:43An excellent entry!
I hope this comment will be published since I was the very active participant on the online exchange we had.
This is to clarify a few matters:
1. I am not from the Cowboy Bar but I am friends with those that commented, online and offline. Your generalizations, using your words in your reply to Vandalin, reflects “the quality of the rebuttals that exists would be an example of its writer’s individual maturity level”
Also, you may be surprised at the education levels of the Barflies, seeing how you think those comments were an implicit result of ‘Singapore’s education system”
2. My initial question was directed at pingpingss, not you. The dialogue was started when you explained on her behalf.
3. You could have stopped at any point of time if you held our discussion on Plurk in such disdain but you continued engaging us in dialogue.
4. I’m pretty sure no one, you included, would like to be referred as “stinky elephant poo” (I replaced dog with elephant as I think the latter has an incredible stench that’s out of this world)
5. Granted I did not think as “deep” into the various possible scenarios as you have listed but I would rather take the risk of ensuring the safety of the lady before I give thought to the possible repercussions like those you have mentioned. And again, this is my personal opinion.
6. We never once wanted ‘to deny you of your views, your complete submission, impose our superior standing and our self righteousness” onto you.
In all honesty, I was hoping that I could persuade you to look at matters differently so that you could potentially help a lady in distress if you ever encounter a similar situation. (And again, this is my personal opinion.)
With all that being said, I think you owe those folks at the Cowboy Bar an apology. After all, I was the one who got you all riled up and I’m not even from the Cowboy Bar.
2009-07-6 @ 20:30
Thank you for your clarification. There is nothing in your comment to give me a reason to censor / deny your entry. Let me answer to your points:
1. Technically what a person is and who he is cannot be defined by a mere few words I used. But if a person chooses to get really worked up over it, it does also reflect on his maturity, or the lack of it, doesn’t it?
Either way I was making a point that the actions of some people (not you or Starmist) perhaps reflect on the sorry state of our educational system. I said nothing about the barflies educational level – some of them could be PhDs for all know.
2. I did not recall seeing it as addressed to “@pingpingss” even while it was right after pingpingss’ comments.
3. It is interesting that you insist that I held our conversation with disdain. Let me quote a part of my post:
The exchange with these two female plurkers isn’t bad at all.
Perhaps if you go through that Plurk, and noticed that from the point we cross swords until the point I left the conversation, I have never for once used a label on you in our dialogue and have also never for once suggested in that Plurk that I think lowly of you.
4. Actually I just describing how I felt and not referring to anyone in particular. But on hindsight either elephant or dog poo does describe someone (not your nor starmist) perfectly.
However, I recalled from one of my zoo visit that elephant poo did not smell as bad when one of the elephants poo’ed – roughly 2 meters in front of us – during the elephant show. Perhaps you have better experience with elephant poo than I do.
5. I understand where you are coming from and I will still stand by my decision. Meantime I suggest you conduct a poll as is among your colleagues, acquaintances and friends and see where true opinion really stands.
6. Why you used ‘we’ in point 6 is interesting. It does suggest to me that a consensus was reached among some, if not all of you. For what objective was this consensus reached if not to do what I described?
I do owe everyone else in Cowboy Bar – minus a few people – an apology. However, since I cannot separate the good souls from the scum and villainy it would be impossible for me to extend that apology, with the notable exception of perhaps just vandalin and some Barflies and perhaps even ex-Barflies I do know personally.
s
Jul 06, 2009, 22:34lycan, one last thing [because i am superbly sick of this and see no reason why i hv to justify (if ever) myself].
1) in nowhere in the plurk hv i ever tried to submit you to my opinion. in fact, i understood that you prefer the ‘i mind my own business’ approach rather to step in to something which may not require anyone’s help.
2) when i spoke about people discussing it with you on an ‘intellectual’ convo, i wasnt referring to me because i know i didnt. perhaps ‘intellectual’ was a wrong word to use.
3) about the ‘an online wretched hive of scum and villainy’ of the cowboy bar, that’s really uncalled for. most of them are VERY nice people and do not deserve this ‘label’ simply because you had the disagreement with the few of us. you did them a grievance with the cardinal sin of generalising.
that’s all.
2009-07-6 @ 23:31
If there was anything even marginally intellectual outside what you and Nerak was saying until I left that conversation, you should point it out. While I would take back my accusation that you were submitting me to your opinion, is it not definitely the case considering some of the background noise going on?
Either way, out of a post of 1271 words, several of you have picked upon my generalisation of Cowboy Bar. I need not point out that if a cabinet minister says something that the people do not like to hear, I would also direct my general anger at the minister’s political party & ministry and even the entire gahmen. In general, the gahmen is made up of capable people who has so far run the country properly. Few or almost no people takes issue with me doing that.
Then again, even family members of the worse criminals think they are extremely nice people too. Not to mention if a person hasn’t wash his asshole for a long time, he would stink too and guess whether people will say he stink, or his asshole stink?
barffie
Jul 06, 2009, 23:43Elephant poo don’t stink as bad as cat or dog poo because it’s all semi-processed plant matter.
It’s the meat we eat that makes our poop smell the way it does. UGH!
Ok tata.
(WTF why got 2 captchas one?!?!!?)
2009-07-6 @ 23:50
Well, this is something you should share with Nerak. Since I was the one who pointed out that it didn’t stink.
barffie
Jul 06, 2009, 23:46Wah your analogies are not helping your reasoning, dude. You risk making people pissed off all over again
Anyway, this was one time when the Barflies stayed civil until quite far down the road. Usually we will all charge in and tear the dude into pieces quite immediately already.
Me ish long-time Barfly, so I’d know. Ciao!
Nerak
Jul 07, 2009, 10:04I’ve seldom been near dog or cat poo so I wouldn’t know and yes elephant poo stinks to heaven (to me at aleast) because the nice elephant at our dear Singapore Zoo poo-ed right before me few years back.
I understand where you’re coming from and you think the ‘background noise’ are utter nonsense. Fine. We cannot impose our ideals on you (like I mentioned in that plurk).
It would seem like you stepped into a kopitiam and got ticked off by everyone (an analogy from a person from Cowboy Bar). Hence, you have an impression that you were a ‘victim’ of cyber bullying. I cannot deny that.
We picked out that comment because it’s not fair to the rest who are from the Cowboy Bar and were not involved in the discussion at all.
Also, the internet is brilliant for its dexterity. It can be used as a platform for intellectual discussion and it can also be a place to just get loads of entertainment, depending on what rocks your boat.
Ultimately, take whatever you see on the internet with several spoonfuls of salt. Shouldn’t you, a blogger, be more aware of that than me, an average person on the street with no blog to start with?
PS: Trust Barffie when she said that Barflies have acted rather civilly this time. And please change the formatting on your comment box, I can hardly see what I’m typing.
2009-07-7 @ 10:35
Ok… I am no expert in poo and I have really only 20secs of experience with fresh elephant poo at 2 meters away so I will not dispute what you are saying.
Plurk is an open place, yet while my comment had ticked off you and Starmist, someone was deliberately fanning the fire – that’s not like I walked into a coffee shop to deliberately tick everyone off.
Either way, I don’t believe in fairness since there is nothing fair in this world. Some people have longer legs, some have not. Even among runners, some have muscles for sprinting and some have muscles for marathon – yes, they are different muscles. The only way we could impose fairness is for everyone to be on the same starting line. Now, similarly there is nothing fair when a person condemns the SMRT for the action of a staff or when a person thinks a particular church are a bunch of snobs due to one person.
If you haven’t get my point – all it needs is one person to foul up a place. I need not point out who I am talking about.
Frankly, if I want to read between the lines, Barffie’s comment sounds like a veiled threat. A friend of mine pointed out had they did what he claimed they normally do, it would simply vindicates me. However, since they have chosen to act civilly, trust me in this: I am actually thankful I am proven wrong about my generalisation about the Barflies.
barffie
Jul 07, 2009, 10:43Veiled threat? Man, you totally misconstrued… I mean, sincerely, we are still engaged in a civil discussion with you off Plurk without calling you a (*&(*)#&()&#(&*%&%. We could, like we did before, but we didn’t. So far.
Until we-know-who turned up for the party and… yeah! You know. Usually he and the other dude will chew up people faster than you can say “huh wtf?”
Not warning you, just congratulating you… Sincerely!
P.S you put super glue on your comment box ah? Why all the letters stick together one?!
2009-07-7 @ 15:09
Well, actually if it had gone (*&(*)#&()&#(&*%&% right away, then some of that won’t get past moderation. I don’t control that what gets caught – the spam filter does and flag it for my attention whether to release the comment or not.
I will look at the .css controlling the format in my comment box when I have the time. Didn’t really noticed it was using a really shitty font, which is different from what is used in ‘admin comments’.
Nerak
Jul 07, 2009, 14:42Dude,
The world is filled with injustice, I agree. Hence it’s up to the individual to make it our world a better living place for people. Like you siad, we are a civilised bunch of people (and some happened to be belong to Cowboy Bar).
Tell me why did you post this entry if you didn’t feel you were victimised and “dealt with unfairly”
*Seriously dude, change the formatting in your comment box*
2009-07-7 @ 15:21
Ok, now I am lost.
Seriously, if it was just that matter on Plurk, I don’t feel I was victimised by you or Starmist. If it was this exchange here, so far most of you (incl. barffie) has so far been very kind to me.
However, after what I experienced in the that plurk, it reminded me of my previous experience so far in other local forums such HWZ, any kind of local online community (be it some shoutbox or chat), even Twitter and soc.culture.singapore newsgroup in USENET and I noticed it hasn’t been pleasant for not just me but quite a number of people as well.
I noticed a common pattern in which very often disagreements degenerates into an exercise of ‘conform or die’ and some poor fxxk gets sort of flamed or intimidated into silence.
On hindsight, if I had made no comment about the cowboy bar, (just as I hadn’t said my comment about leaving the girl to the so-called consequences of her decision), perhaps my opinion would be far better received. Thanks for pointing that out to me.
And yes, I will look at the formatting in my comment box because I had used this theme with minimal modifications and until I tried to post a comment as anonymous earlier, I didn’t even realised just how terrible the fonts looked!
tigerkiller
Jul 07, 2009, 15:03After reading everything, and seeing what everyone has to say, there is one thing I do not get…
It is obvious at least to me that your intense dislike is with just one guy TK, but on the other hand you mentioned that you cannot see his posts.
Can you or can you not see what he wrote? or are you just trying to ignore him?
Anyway, I know of this cowboy bar, and seriously, you should have seen some of their earlier works. They seem pretty tone down already. I would humbly suggest that your apology that you almost made above, be just freely given.
2009-07-7 @ 16:01
As long as I view the plurk as a standalone page – like the link in the post above – his comments are not visible to me.
I regret my generalisation, which I made as a result of information which I have not verified. I will give you and barffie the benefit of doubt that it is now a much better place. As such I would MODIFY my post to show my allegation in the PAST TENSE.
Almost Infamous
Jul 07, 2009, 18:46Ah yes, the (in)famous “I have my own opinion, and damn anyone else that has another” defense.
Here’s the thing – yes, you have the right to an opinion. That right comes with a big caveat – that everyone else has a right to be disgusted with your opinion and tell that to you in your face.
You seem like a pretty smart guy, so I need to ask you this. You’ve admitted yourself already that you know your view to be the unpopular one, especially among women, and yet you gave it. Why? What’s so special about your idea that needed to be put out into the marketplace of ideas?
More importantly, what’s so special about your idea that you would expect civility despite its unpopularity?
The phenomenon you’ve noted isn’t unique to Singaporeans or the Internet – it’s common to the human race. You state a view that transgresses the behavioural norms of a given social group, you get ready to get your opinion blasted in a vigorous and odoriferous manner. It’s no different from cracking wife-beating jokes to feminists, or Lee Kuan Yew jokes to PAP members.
I asked those questions because I detect a subtle arrogance in your blog post – the arrogance of the intelligent talking down to his intellectual inferiors. That the social group is somehow wrong for not condoning your view. That the social group has no right to include or exclude members as it sees fit (think about that last one for a while – the right to free speech comes with the right of freedom of assembly for a reason).
What you’ve done is no different from what the PAP prescribes – listen to what I have to say, for I am smarter than you, even if what I say is unpopular. You may very well be right, but you’d still be an arrogant prick.
2009-07-7 @ 19:40
Thank you Anthony for your comment. I’ve sent you a mail on Facebook.
barffie
Jul 07, 2009, 22:04Ya it’s like telling me that kicking kittens makes you shiok or something. I will hound you down and beat you up.
Nerak
Jul 08, 2009, 10:03And I have always wondered why my mum insisted that I must study hard!
@AlmostInfamous: I want to be like you when I grow up! Or at least start a blog hor.
@Barffie: Chill babe chill. Do you need a chill pill ah?
@Lycan: I don’t think anyone using a nick will appreciate someone using his real name online.
And your formatting in the comment box is now slightly better.
2009-07-8 @ 10:20
Nah. His name was on his blog. Found it when I went to the link he left behind to look at his blog, and when I looked at his comment again I found the email address familiar so I search it up on my Facebook and he appeared under my friend’s list.
He’s an old acquaintance from a long time ago. The pre-Internet days when we were still using 2400 modems over phone lines to dial up to BBS. It is rare that almost 15 years since we first exchanged messages on a BBS called Lothlorien, we have maintained a link, albeit a weak one.