Ponpokku, others have commented that the action of putting his name down might have a possible detrimental effect on his grades or status in school, do you not think that this should be a possible consideration? Another possible detriment is the media frenzy that he might generate due to him identifying himself? I can't say for sure, but it is likely that he/she has done a pros and cons analysis and decided against it. My own opinion is that if the internet offers you the power of anonymity, then that power is there to be utilised. I don't see any of us in the forum putting down our names to every comment we make, do you?
With regards pointing fingers, I think the main gripe is the use of words in such an important and far-reaching email, note that it was sent to the school community. Without evidence, saying things like "the student attacked the prof" is tantamount to passing speculation off as facts. If we were to observe the code of ethics in journalism, the least one could do is add in the word "allegedly". It makes a world of difference, as an example, probably "the student allegedly attacked the prof", in this sentence, an element of doubt is apparent, which is very necessary.
I think anyone can speculate, however its wrong if you pass off your speculation as facts. A simple analogy would be if Mr. A didn't see you commit a crime, but he goes around telling the world that you are a criminal, how would you feel? I hope we can all start to empathize with the situation at hand.
I can't help reading what you wrote and quote this, posted earlier:
Quote:
Lastly, I appeal to all students, staff and the society at large, as discerning intelligent life forms, to reserve judgement until more evidence is released, the police are still investigating, and we should not make unfair generalizations, assumptions or speculation. Before making any false, hasty, insensitive, and foolish sweeping statements, please bear in mind the hurt that we would bring to our Indonesian friends or anyone in connection to this case whatsoever. Like others, I too was originally blinded, and to some extent cheated by both you and singapore's mainstream media of which I have lost all trust in, but like the enlightened others, I started to think with my head.
While you think that anonymity is ours to use, it is anonymity that allows many to speculate the situation until we now no longer know what to believe. There had been no facts yet, but it seems that the sentiments at all other sites linked point to the idea that the deceased is an angel. As you pointed, there is no proof yet, so what gives all of them the right to claim that they are right and those against them are wrong?
Credibility is another problem here. As much as these people are afraid of being blacklisted, I wonder if they had ever tried doing otherwise and see if they will get blacklisted. I know because I had done that before - listing my name in forum posts here, and got called up by NTU because of certain remarks that in the end was actually sorted out in a nice and clean way. I have set that precedence, the question is whether they are willing to do so.
__________________
It was wonderful to fly away, to challenge the wind, the imagination...
Gohweihan, I would like to point out that of the two quotes you mentioned, the former was written by me, while the latter was posted by me and not written by me. But this is a small matter compared to the misunderstanding that you have regarding this issue. None of the sites linked by the writer points to the idea that the deceased is an angel, the sites just point to the idea that labelling the deceased as a lunatic attacker is wrong until evidence of this has been brought to the fore. Nobody is claiming anything except that it is wrong for Dr. Su and portions of the mainstream media to say "the student attacked the prof", maybe they probably should say "the student allegedly attacked the prof". There should be an element of doubt unless factual evidence point otherwise. Wouldn't you agree?
With regards to your point on credibility, may i ask which part do you deem incredulous? Are you doubting the fact that the president indeed sent out that email? If you were an ex-student of NTU, maybe you could ask your juniors to forward the mail to you? So if the writer put down his name as JAMES TAN, will it suddenly make him so much more credible? Or would you check up on him to see if there's really such a character. Come on, its not who said it that matters, its whether what he said is poignant. Though I feel its poignant, but apparently many people do not get the gist, maybe the writer should re-write his post in a more direct way and reply to this thread.
i agree anonymity will not affect the credibility of the letter in any way as its content is not a theory itself, but just an encouragement for people to reserve judgment.
i doubt the president would apologize though.
his first instinct would be to protect his staff, irregardless of fault. we all know how professors work these days. for me it's just hearsay, so i'm not going to insinuate anything, but we should open the door for the possibility that the professor could have done something.
being so quick to conclude the student was the attacker also somewhat got me a little suspicious about the whole thing.
then again, the truth will never be out...
__________________
i'm the light of the evening sky
where shadows cast upon our eyes...
Gohweihan, I would like to point out that of the two quotes you mentioned, the former was written by me, while the latter was posted by me and not written by me. But this is a small matter compared to the misunderstanding that you have regarding this issue. None of the sites linked by the writer points to the idea that the deceased is an angel, the sites just point to the idea that labelling the deceased as a lunatic attacker is wrong until evidence of this has been brought to the fore. Nobody is claiming anything except that it is wrong for Dr. Su and portions of the mainstream media to say "the student attacked the prof", maybe they probably should say "the student allegedly attacked the prof". There should be an element of doubt unless factual evidence point otherwise. Wouldn't you agree?
There is absolutely no misunderstanding. I was pointing towards the sentiments at the site, including the comments and flames towards everyone who goes against the idea that there just might not be a conspiracy. All that I'm asking is that instead of targetting just NTU and Dr Su, target everyone who post claims without proof, those at the linked sites (not just the posts, but the comments as well) included. If you want to be objective, do it to all, not just to certain parties. Your own credibility is at stake here as well.
Quote:
With regards to your point on credibility, may i ask which part do you deem incredulous? Are you doubting the fact that the president indeed sent out that email? If you were an ex-student of NTU, maybe you could ask your juniors to forward the mail to you? So if the writer put down his name as JAMES TAN, will it suddenly make him so much more credible? Or would you check up on him to see if there's really such a character. Come on, its not who said it that matters, its whether what he said is poignant. Though I feel its poignant, but apparently many people do not get the gist, maybe the writer should re-write his post in a more direct way and reply to this thread.
I am a PhD scholar in NTU. I don't need you to tell me what's happening. And no, I'm not attempting to please NTU here by posting such posts (recall that I've been critical of them too).
And yes, putting a name symbolizes responsibility towards the posted item. It gives an avenue of contact should there be a need for further action. The act of hiding merely shows shunning of responsibility towards what's posted. Analogically, assuming that what is posted is true, then that person could come out and claim credit. Otherwise, he could just disappear into oblivion and thus his credibility is not impacted. While it is nice to be anonymous, it is detrimental to have accountability so that people do not use this platform to spread lies and slander. It's more about the platform, not the incident itself. As for this post, it is agreeable that it calls for restraint in commenting, albeit a little one-sided. Therefore a name would be good to follow up on why he decided to only target one-side of the story.
Anyway, most of the time it is not just about what someone said, but the person who said it as well. Just look at the alternative media scene in Malaysia for a good example of this. In fact, anonymity serves to make it worse for the writer because he is literally a nobody, not even a stakeholder in NTU as far as readers are concerned. In addition, the fact is, many had called for restraint, myself included in my blog. How do you know this person isn't taking other people's words and making it his, thus claiming credit for it? And with neither your name nor your friend's name, what's stopping people from thinking that you are in fact the original author of the post, and claiming it was for a friend to escape responsibility of answering to the content of the post?
__________________
It was wonderful to fly away, to challenge the wind, the imagination...
Last edited by gohweihan : 10-03-2009 at 03:43 AM.
Ponpokku, others have commented that the action of putting his name down might have a possible detrimental effect on his grades or status in school, do you not think that this should be a possible consideration? Another possible detriment is the media frenzy that he might generate due to him identifying himself? I can't say for sure, but it is likely that he/she has done a pros and cons analysis and decided against it. My own opinion is that if the internet offers you the power of anonymity, then that power is there to be utilised. I don't see any of us in the forum putting down our names to every comment we make, do you?
please, this is an online forum, not an official channel. i think it's quite common sense. besides, even when this is non-official and ppl here enjoy certain level of anonymity, u still have to put down ur email when u register, and ur IP address can be logged. there is oso a post count merchanism and a record of ur previous posts for ppl to judge whether u are credible or not.
no doubt one can tell a tale here, but if a person wants to sent a message specifically to another person holding a public/official post, a civil servant, in an open letter, then thats a different case altogether. it becomes official, and it may concern the interests of multiple parties. so the writer should address himself. when it comes to an official statement, then a name, a feedback channel is required, no matter what kind of content is written.
by 'appealing' to students, staff and general public to reserve their judgement and not to spread false info, the writer is already suggesting (at least hinting) to the audience whom he's addressing, that such things are already happening. no matter how neutral his words may be, the hint is there. since the deceased is no longer talking, the probable 'suspect(s)' of commiting such acts are probably the others 'involved' in the incident, including the wounded lecturer, or even the NTU prez. now the open letter stands a chance of swaying public opinions and pressurizing certain parties. u dont shoot in the dark without giving the other party a chance to return the favour in such matters. it becomes overly convenient to damage other ppl's credibility and reputation.
besides, since u oso started other threads here in this forum hinting that there is a conspiracy going on, and certain ppl are responsible, u already made ur stand. see, even if it's just a forum nick/ID, u are already being identified. so it is even more important that u state the sources of the articles u quote, bcos obviously u are no longer neutral. or maybe, u can try 'making full use of anonymity on the internet', by creating multiple clones to spread the idea that there is a conspiracy? then u can see for urself how does this anonymity affects ur credibility.
__________________
switch off the lights and its all the same...
Actually if u really want the president to read it.
Why not send an email to him?
I doubt he reads hardwarezone forum.
thats the idea. it becomes obvious that certain parties are trying to accumulate public pressure, cos HWZ is not even connected to NTU in anyway whats the point of posting here? it cerainly defeats the positive message the writer is trying to convey.
__________________
switch off the lights and its all the same...
TalonRaven, it seems to me that you have committed the same fallacy of hasty generalization as both the president and the mainstream media. Nowhere in the letter does the writer ask for a school break. From what i've read, the writer is asking for action to be taken by the president, and went on to contribute a list of possible actions. He only asked for action, what action that will be, ultimately the onus falls on the president. Please do not jump to conclusions and make false assumptions, and please do not poison the well so to speak. You seem to understand the writer's intent, but yet have fallen into the same trap. Practice what you preach, shouldn't we?
*ahem*
Quote:
Originally Posted by prawncrackyourballs
Possible measures would be to call for a temporary school break of a few days, debunk the myths and inform the NTU and NIE communities of the facts of this unfortunate tragedy, counselling sessions for all students that have some relation to this case, briefing sessions for all students and staff on the follow-up actions on the school's part. Up till now, we haven't really felt assured by your leadership.
Colour it whatever way you want. "contribute a list of possible actions" falls under the same category as "asking". Hence the suggestion of suspicion.
Quote:
thats the idea. it becomes obvious that certain parties are trying to accumulate public pressure, cos HWZ is not even connected to NTU in anyway whats the point of posting here? it cerainly defeats the positive message the writer is trying to convey.
Well, it could have been simultaneously sent, just to give him the benefit of the doubt.
__________________
Resisting the alluring charms of EDMW Speak everyday.
This is the internet, your new age digital media.
If you want to remain anonymous, people can still track you down.
All we need is a mac address, domain, computer name, you'll be hunted
Go ahead.
__________________
Short one. long one. big one. small one. so which one you want?
Gohweihan,
"target everyone who post claims without proof", do you want the writer to write an article or a thesis statement targeting everyone in the world? please, this is just a simple letter to NTU's president to request that he does not pass off speculation that "the student attacked the prof" as fact. As to "do it to all", why don't you pick up the mantle after you've thrown down the gauntlet?
"Therefore a name would be good to follow up on why he decided to only target one-side of the story", so in your opinion what is the other side of the story? Dr. Su did not say "the prof attack the student", so as far as this letter goes, it seems that there is only one side of the fact that Dr. Su has seriously erred, especially as the deceased cannot defend himself. Again, the main question is does the message that the writer is trying to convey poignant? does it resonate with you? I hope it does, because its something called empathy.
Ponpokku,
glad to see you agree that the writer is trying to convey a positive message. Then my suggestion would be for us to take the positives. Whether or not there is a conspiracy or not, lets all just remain neutral like what the writer suggested, I will take up the suggestion and let the police tell us their findings.
TalonRaven,
colour it however you want but I do not share the sentiment that "'contribute a list of possible actions' falls under the same category as 'asking'", and I don't think you'll be able to find any dictionary, thesauras, English lecturer that will agree with you that they are equal. There are fundamental differences between "Can you do this?" and "Can you do something? Possible measure are...".
In any case, our very own SAF imposes a cessation of military training whenever there are accidental deaths in the military. The break time is used to inform, console, counsel, and review. Don't you think that students that witness or are related to the incident might be in any way traumatise? Even the students that walk past the incident area might feel uneasy in some ways. As a classmate, coursemate, schoolmate, hallmate, can you concentrate on your normal routine? Maybe you would like to empathise with people's situations more, I for one, can see the possible merits of having a break. I'm not suggesting that it should be implemented, but I can see why the writer feels its plausible.
This is the internet, your new age digital media.
If you want to remain anonymous, people can still track you down.
All we need is a mac address, domain, computer name, you'll be hunted
Go ahead.
Haha, there you have it, all Abdrazak84 wants to know is who the writer is, he wants to hunt the writer down. Then what? What do you want to do to him? Where are you coming from, and what do you want to achieve at the end of it all? This is very interesting indeed. I'm really puzzled, and the way you put it across, I doubt the writer or anyone else in the future will ever put their name down, for fear of being hunted, or for fear of what Abdrazak84 wants to do to them.
Gohweihan,
"target everyone who post claims without proof", do you want the writer to write an article or a thesis statement targeting everyone in the world? please, this is just a simple letter to NTU's president to request that he does not pass off speculation that "the student attacked the prof" as fact. As to "do it to all", why don't you pick up the mantle after you've thrown down the gauntlet?
So you think it is alright to ask the President not to pass off speculation that "the Indonesian attacked the professor" as fact, but it is alright for others online to pass of speculation (you included, based on your other thread) that the Indonesian is innocent as fact? And don't you dare claim that his words carry more weight, because you disregard what I told you about the credibility issue, and that those online posts are in the public domain as well (thus the same as the President's message). Neutrality my foot.
I don't preach what I don't do. Google my name if you wish to read what I posted about neutrality on this issue.
And yes, I expect the writer to address all parties, not just Dr Su and NTU, if he is by principle a netural person.
Quote:
"Therefore a name would be good to follow up on why he decided to only target one-side of the story", so in your opinion what is the other side of the story? Dr. Su did not say "the prof attack the student", so as far as this letter goes, it seems that there is only one side of the fact that Dr. Su has seriously erred, especially as the deceased cannot defend himself. Again, the main question is does the message that the writer is trying to convey poignant? does it resonate with you? I hope it does, because its something called empathy.
By one-side of the story, I meant only targetting those who in your words speculate against the Indonesian (i.e. NTU and Dr Su). Therefore the other side of the story naturally are those who speculate that the Indonesian is innocent. Why no word on what those people say?
I don't mix empathy with rationality when doing analysis, so go figure. Call me emotionless if you want to. But I know I cannot stand a pot calling a kettle black, especially when the pot is is doing that under the guise of asking for neutrality.
__________________
It was wonderful to fly away, to challenge the wind, the imagination...
Last edited by gohweihan : 10-03-2009 at 06:57 PM.
Haha, there you have it, all Abdrazak84 wants to know is who the writer is, he wants to hunt the writer down. Then what? What do you want to do to him? Where are you coming from, and what do you want to achieve at the end of it all? This is very interesting indeed. I'm really puzzled, and the way you put it across, I doubt the writer or anyone else in the future will ever put their name down, for fear of being hunted, or for fear of what Abdrazak84 wants to do to them.
I don't think you understand what he meant. He just said that anybody can be traced online. Why give him such an immature reply?
__________________
It was wonderful to fly away, to challenge the wind, the imagination...
Channels
TECH GUIDES
