Kumar22
Arch-Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2019
- Messages
- 16,767
- Reaction score
- 6,414
I got 3 points some time back.
Context: WhyNPNT and Ayayaangry either got banned or had their ability to use all the forums functions curtailed.
Which is which, doesn't matter. Somebody said, why don't appeal to forum Admin Vijay.
I replied Vijay is useless. Meaning of course, he won't do anything. Or maybe perhaps, his manner of running things don't square with mine.
This is an infarction?
I can criticise the Govt of being useless, I can criticise Ministers as useless. I have done so and so have many others. We are not taken to task, we are not sued, nobody reports us in that FB or other social media issue bans or whatever.
This is a personal opinion. Just because I say you're useless, does it you are? I may think you're usless, another may think you're a saint or the most capable person ever. What difference is there?
So I ask a few things:
1) Is Vijay insulted by those remarks, if so, how please explain. So perhaps I can understand what is wrong and maybe seek a fuller clarification from SPH as to the limits of criticising its officers.
2) If Vijay was not insulted or didn't feel so, then which learned Mod thought it was that it needed an infarction?
If indeed calling someone useless is deemed insulting, then I expect that every time someone in the forum criticises anybody be it a political party, a sportsman, an MP, a business leader, just about anybody, that it becomes an insult and action will be taken.
Because I'm 100% sure if today I write to Khaw Boon Hwan your new SPH Chairman or CEO or whatever role he has and say directly to him, I think you're useless and shouldn't be given the job, he's not gonna feel an insult and will just brush it off. My opinion good or bad, won't detract him from the job he has been detailed to do.
So what is good for the goose must be good for the gander.
Thus I expect a revocation of this ridiculous infarction. If you insist though it's correct then possibly I may have to write to Mr Khaw directly and seek his wisdom on the matter, to clarify the issue once and for all.
Context: WhyNPNT and Ayayaangry either got banned or had their ability to use all the forums functions curtailed.
Which is which, doesn't matter. Somebody said, why don't appeal to forum Admin Vijay.
I replied Vijay is useless. Meaning of course, he won't do anything. Or maybe perhaps, his manner of running things don't square with mine.
This is an infarction?
I can criticise the Govt of being useless, I can criticise Ministers as useless. I have done so and so have many others. We are not taken to task, we are not sued, nobody reports us in that FB or other social media issue bans or whatever.
This is a personal opinion. Just because I say you're useless, does it you are? I may think you're usless, another may think you're a saint or the most capable person ever. What difference is there?
So I ask a few things:
1) Is Vijay insulted by those remarks, if so, how please explain. So perhaps I can understand what is wrong and maybe seek a fuller clarification from SPH as to the limits of criticising its officers.
2) If Vijay was not insulted or didn't feel so, then which learned Mod thought it was that it needed an infarction?
If indeed calling someone useless is deemed insulting, then I expect that every time someone in the forum criticises anybody be it a political party, a sportsman, an MP, a business leader, just about anybody, that it becomes an insult and action will be taken.
Because I'm 100% sure if today I write to Khaw Boon Hwan your new SPH Chairman or CEO or whatever role he has and say directly to him, I think you're useless and shouldn't be given the job, he's not gonna feel an insult and will just brush it off. My opinion good or bad, won't detract him from the job he has been detailed to do.
So what is good for the goose must be good for the gander.
Thus I expect a revocation of this ridiculous infarction. If you insist though it's correct then possibly I may have to write to Mr Khaw directly and seek his wisdom on the matter, to clarify the issue once and for all.