The title should actually read "Half-Awake and Well-Fed from Kuching.
A warm hello (and I do mean warm) from the Land of the Cats - also known in myspeak as "The Land Where In-Laws Overfeed" and "The Land Where I Get To Oversleep". Thanks to the blessings of the Ingterneck , I'm now writing this from a cafe where locals rip off foreigners (that's me) for exhoribitant rates on the computer.
They charge by the hour - so like a typical kiasu Singaporean, I don't feel that I've gotten enough mileage until AFTER I spend the full hour on the computer and email alone just doesn't cut it!
God bless the exchange rate, for it alloweth me to abuse the ringgit.
I can never get over the fact that the stuff's so cheap here. And fresh (get your minds out of the gutter). This afternoon I had the freshest corn I ever tasted. Last night and this afternoon, we ate homemade popiah for lunch. Once I get home to a computer where I can actually upload photo's I'll blog on what a Real Man's Popiah is.
That's it for today's instalment. Tomorrow I will write on why local food's...local.
Saturday, April 30, 2005
Friday, April 29, 2005
Into The Wind
I had a funny post. It's been sitting on my dashboard for the longest time. I just don't have the heart to complete it.
You see, today's my last day of full-time employment, for the forseeable future. I will be back, to and fro, and I know I will see them again. You don't get rid of a lawyer that easily.
Yet somehow, things are slowly changing. This is another link to Singapore I've destroyed to get to San Francisco. It's painful. Two days ago I found out one of my colleagues and best friends in my company is pregnant. She's the first of my female friends that I would have had an oppurtunity to see carry a baby to term - except that now I must leave, and I won't be back until the baby's born.
Friends don't grow apart? I beg to differ. When you have a continent and time zone differences, when you start having fewer and fewer shared experiences, you slowly drift. They will have gone on with their own lives, as will you. Their kids will grow up not knowing that, sometime in the past, you shared laughter over lunchtime kopi with their parents.
I'll miss them terribly.
You see, today's my last day of full-time employment, for the forseeable future. I will be back, to and fro, and I know I will see them again. You don't get rid of a lawyer that easily.
Yet somehow, things are slowly changing. This is another link to Singapore I've destroyed to get to San Francisco. It's painful. Two days ago I found out one of my colleagues and best friends in my company is pregnant. She's the first of my female friends that I would have had an oppurtunity to see carry a baby to term - except that now I must leave, and I won't be back until the baby's born.
Friends don't grow apart? I beg to differ. When you have a continent and time zone differences, when you start having fewer and fewer shared experiences, you slowly drift. They will have gone on with their own lives, as will you. Their kids will grow up not knowing that, sometime in the past, you shared laughter over lunchtime kopi with their parents.
I'll miss them terribly.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
When You Blog, the World Blogs With You
Being one of the unintentional perpetrators of the recent lynch-mob style postings on Steve McDermott's blog, I found myself in the unenviable situation of watching a mob tear apart an inflammatory post. I honestly did not know which was worse.
Hence, it was with some relief that I read Cowboy Caleb's wonderful article about the Singapore Blogosphere. The post is an important and timely reminder to Singapore Bloggers.
In particular, I feel for one of the Cowboy's thoughts:
"Our blogs are being taken seriously now. Our blogs are being watched. Bloggers, thy name is Legion. They would cast us out if they could because we cannot be contro[l]led. We can make or break a person, business or idea if we choose to do so. And most of the time we are doing this, even if we’re not aware of what we’re doing."
Further, Shion, a commentator on the Cowboy's post, wrote:
"The nature of the internet , and the beauty of it, is the ANARCHY."
Darned tootin'. I'll go out on a limb and say that the "free-speech" nature of blogging is especially appealing to Singaporeans, as is the "no-holds-barred" nature of the Internet. Blogging is a powerful tool, and indeed, Singaporean bloggers do have the freedom to blog in the manner they choose.
I write this post, however, as an appeal to the good sense of Singaporeans.
Recent events have reminded me of the preferred justice system in an anarchic environment - the lynch mob. Let's face it. CZ got lynch-mobbed. So did McDermott. I can't say they were entirely faultless, but some of the responses I've seen to their postings were really disproportionate to what they deserved. I saw racist comments directed at McDermott - far worse than what CZ wrote and got lynched for. I understand that there's a strong knee-jerk reaction to a particularly inflammatory post. I know because I felt that same knee-jerk reaction when attempting to frame a response to McDermott.
But that's the whole point about having enlightened free choice right? That we don't have to do unto others as they have done to us.
Cowboy Caleb is right. The world is indeed watching our actions, and what we post. However, the world is also watching our reactions, and how graciously we bloggers treat the ungracious.
We can be a gang. Or we can be a gentlemen's club.
It's our choice.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogosphere
Hence, it was with some relief that I read Cowboy Caleb's wonderful article about the Singapore Blogosphere. The post is an important and timely reminder to Singapore Bloggers.
In particular, I feel for one of the Cowboy's thoughts:
"Our blogs are being taken seriously now. Our blogs are being watched. Bloggers, thy name is Legion. They would cast us out if they could because we cannot be contro[l]led. We can make or break a person, business or idea if we choose to do so. And most of the time we are doing this, even if we’re not aware of what we’re doing."
Further, Shion, a commentator on the Cowboy's post, wrote:
"The nature of the internet , and the beauty of it, is the ANARCHY."
Darned tootin'. I'll go out on a limb and say that the "free-speech" nature of blogging is especially appealing to Singaporeans, as is the "no-holds-barred" nature of the Internet. Blogging is a powerful tool, and indeed, Singaporean bloggers do have the freedom to blog in the manner they choose.
I write this post, however, as an appeal to the good sense of Singaporeans.
Recent events have reminded me of the preferred justice system in an anarchic environment - the lynch mob. Let's face it. CZ got lynch-mobbed. So did McDermott. I can't say they were entirely faultless, but some of the responses I've seen to their postings were really disproportionate to what they deserved. I saw racist comments directed at McDermott - far worse than what CZ wrote and got lynched for. I understand that there's a strong knee-jerk reaction to a particularly inflammatory post. I know because I felt that same knee-jerk reaction when attempting to frame a response to McDermott.
But that's the whole point about having enlightened free choice right? That we don't have to do unto others as they have done to us.
Cowboy Caleb is right. The world is indeed watching our actions, and what we post. However, the world is also watching our reactions, and how graciously we bloggers treat the ungracious.
We can be a gang. Or we can be a gentlemen's club.
It's our choice.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogosphere
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Almost Infamous Part IV
One day, a couple of years ago, I tuned my television to Channel News Asia for the first time. There, with some astonishment, I saw someone I never expected to see again.
Eh, relac with the "foxy" jokes can?
I met her in passing 10 years ago at Pre-U Seminar. She was a presenter for TPJC, and I was a presenter for ACJC. We had been allocated to the same discussion group. For reasons that were largely my own fault, I was a presenter in name only. So I listened to presentations. A lot.
I think I must have developed a bit of an infamous reputation during that Pre-U seminar. Because I was free from the pressure of having to present the school in the best possible light, I could ponder and ask questions. I also had the inclination to do so, being pissed at myself for being backbenched.
So I asked questions. I asked a lot of them. I asked very difficult questions that I knew had no easy answer. I did it because I could. I didn't care what the answers were - I just wanted to ask them to watch other people squirm.
As you can see, I was a pretty horrible teenager.
Then there was Cheryl. Cheryl was one of those incredibly sunny people that somehow had a worse reputation than they deserved. She hung around a friend of mine, Wally T, a lot. By extension I ended up hanging around Cheryl a lot. Wally T was one of those people that everyone couldn't find fault with, so he didn't mind the fact that I was a prick and that Cheryl had an undeserved rep. Heck, we even had an impromptu Rick Price karaoke session at the Istana gardens to entertain ourselves while we were waiting for the then-President to grace us with his presence. I sang Rick Price. My falsetto was a lot stronger then.
Then came the day that Cheryl's group had to present. I didn't ask a single question that day. It wasn't because I had a crush on her or anything. The target of my affections that year was someone else that will be consigned to the depths of my memory.
See, I figured that if I was that much of a prick and Cheryl hung out with me anyway, she didn't need anyone to make her life more difficult.Wally T was strangely approving of my unusual silence.
Cheryl, not sure if you remember me at all, but this one's for you.
Eh, relac with the "foxy" jokes can?
I met her in passing 10 years ago at Pre-U Seminar. She was a presenter for TPJC, and I was a presenter for ACJC. We had been allocated to the same discussion group. For reasons that were largely my own fault, I was a presenter in name only. So I listened to presentations. A lot.
I think I must have developed a bit of an infamous reputation during that Pre-U seminar. Because I was free from the pressure of having to present the school in the best possible light, I could ponder and ask questions. I also had the inclination to do so, being pissed at myself for being backbenched.
So I asked questions. I asked a lot of them. I asked very difficult questions that I knew had no easy answer. I did it because I could. I didn't care what the answers were - I just wanted to ask them to watch other people squirm.
As you can see, I was a pretty horrible teenager.
Then there was Cheryl. Cheryl was one of those incredibly sunny people that somehow had a worse reputation than they deserved. She hung around a friend of mine, Wally T, a lot. By extension I ended up hanging around Cheryl a lot. Wally T was one of those people that everyone couldn't find fault with, so he didn't mind the fact that I was a prick and that Cheryl had an undeserved rep. Heck, we even had an impromptu Rick Price karaoke session at the Istana gardens to entertain ourselves while we were waiting for the then-President to grace us with his presence. I sang Rick Price. My falsetto was a lot stronger then.
Then came the day that Cheryl's group had to present. I didn't ask a single question that day. It wasn't because I had a crush on her or anything. The target of my affections that year was someone else that will be consigned to the depths of my memory.
See, I figured that if I was that much of a prick and Cheryl hung out with me anyway, she didn't need anyone to make her life more difficult.Wally T was strangely approving of my unusual silence.
Cheryl, not sure if you remember me at all, but this one's for you.
Monday, April 25, 2005
Suspects are Guilty...Otherwise They Wouldn't Be Suspects!
Having read the recent controversy over the Shanmugram Muguretsu, I feel compelled to add my 0.02. Especially after I've seen an excellent series of articles by Gilbert Koh, here, here and here.
Let me now state that I've got the utmost respect for Gilbert Koh. If nothing else, his articles show a depth of experience as a trial lawyer I -definitely- don't have, and explain a complex area of law extremely well. He justifies the status quo position extremely well. I agree with many of the things that Gilbert says...in isolation.
(You can see a "BUT" coming don't you?)
My apologies in advance if I offend. This post is not written to whack Gilbert's articles good good, nor to offend. This post is to point out the flaw in the operation of presumptions in Singapore.
Presumption of Death
I'm a moderate conservative. In principle, I support a country's right to impose the death sentence. I'm also all for tough crime-control legislative models, and consequently, I've no problems with Singapore using presumptions to establish guilt in hard-to-detect situations.
What I do have a problem with is the fundamental fact that presumptions are a convenience. And this particular convenience kills.
Let me explain. Under Singapore law, there is what's called a double presumption. The law presumes that when drugs found in a person's possession, the person knows the exact nature of what in his possession. The law further presumes that a person possessing drugs beyond a certain quantity (dependent on the type of drug) is presumed to be trafficking the drug.
Let's take Gilbert's second example, to wit:
"Suppose I am caught with a large suitcase of illegal drugs. One kilogram of heroin, three plastic bags of cannabis and 1,000 Ecstasy pills. And one million dollars hidden in a secret suitcase compartment."
Now, think about what happens if I just -happen- to be found holding this, cos it looks really similar to my bag and I just hauled it off the luggage belt by mistake.
Gilbert goes on further to say:
"You see, there is a remote possibility that I am not a trafficker. Perhaps I only bought the drugs for my own personal consumption, not for trafficking. I bought them in bulk and intended to consume them myself over a long time. As for the million dollars, it was all my own money, earned from my amazing luck in the stock market. Yes, I like to carry all my money in my suitcase. Of course it would be a good idea to hide it in a secret compartment!"
That's absolutely right. Except that the "This isn't my luggage" excuse is going to sound lame - even if it is the absolute truth. What happens then?
Singapore - Home of the Hard-Core
There's another presumption that I find disturbing under Singapore law. There's a provision under the Criminal Procedure Code that allows the police to take a statement from you after you've been charged. This statement has powerful legal effect - there's a presumption of adverse inference if the accused subsequently clams up or contradicts his earlier statement.
There are justifications for this - the police must be allowed to take the strongest evidence possible, and very often, this will be found in what the accused did/did not say in his initial statement, before he has a chance to fabricate an alibi.
What I find disturbing is the fact that this statement is not released to the accused's lawyers until the eve of the trial and that a lawyer is not allowed to be present during the taking of this statement. The police and prosecution essentially has its way with the accused before the defence even has a chance to breathe.
My greatest difficulty here is the erosion of the only effective legal defence against said statement - that the statement was obtained out of coercion. Case law has held that forcing the accused to sit on an ice block while blasting him with air conditioning is not coercion. It's also not coercion to deprive accused of food and drink for 9 hours.
I'm fairly sure that after this sort of treatment I'd have admitted to anything, even to things I didn't do. Especially if I wasn't advised on the consequences of my admission.
Conclusion
My point here is not to show that presumptions are per se bad. My point is that certain presumptions drafted under Singapore law are drafted or interpreted in a kiasu way. It captures more than what is necessary. It erodes safeguards to allow the convenience greater operation than is originally intended. Can we really afford to take shortcuts like this?
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Law
Let me now state that I've got the utmost respect for Gilbert Koh. If nothing else, his articles show a depth of experience as a trial lawyer I -definitely- don't have, and explain a complex area of law extremely well. He justifies the status quo position extremely well. I agree with many of the things that Gilbert says...in isolation.
(You can see a "BUT" coming don't you?)
My apologies in advance if I offend. This post is not written to whack Gilbert's articles good good, nor to offend. This post is to point out the flaw in the operation of presumptions in Singapore.
Presumption of Death
I'm a moderate conservative. In principle, I support a country's right to impose the death sentence. I'm also all for tough crime-control legislative models, and consequently, I've no problems with Singapore using presumptions to establish guilt in hard-to-detect situations.
What I do have a problem with is the fundamental fact that presumptions are a convenience. And this particular convenience kills.
Let me explain. Under Singapore law, there is what's called a double presumption. The law presumes that when drugs found in a person's possession, the person knows the exact nature of what in his possession. The law further presumes that a person possessing drugs beyond a certain quantity (dependent on the type of drug) is presumed to be trafficking the drug.
Let's take Gilbert's second example, to wit:
"Suppose I am caught with a large suitcase of illegal drugs. One kilogram of heroin, three plastic bags of cannabis and 1,000 Ecstasy pills. And one million dollars hidden in a secret suitcase compartment."
Now, think about what happens if I just -happen- to be found holding this, cos it looks really similar to my bag and I just hauled it off the luggage belt by mistake.
Gilbert goes on further to say:
"You see, there is a remote possibility that I am not a trafficker. Perhaps I only bought the drugs for my own personal consumption, not for trafficking. I bought them in bulk and intended to consume them myself over a long time. As for the million dollars, it was all my own money, earned from my amazing luck in the stock market. Yes, I like to carry all my money in my suitcase. Of course it would be a good idea to hide it in a secret compartment!"
That's absolutely right. Except that the "This isn't my luggage" excuse is going to sound lame - even if it is the absolute truth. What happens then?
Singapore - Home of the Hard-Core
There's another presumption that I find disturbing under Singapore law. There's a provision under the Criminal Procedure Code that allows the police to take a statement from you after you've been charged. This statement has powerful legal effect - there's a presumption of adverse inference if the accused subsequently clams up or contradicts his earlier statement.
There are justifications for this - the police must be allowed to take the strongest evidence possible, and very often, this will be found in what the accused did/did not say in his initial statement, before he has a chance to fabricate an alibi.
What I find disturbing is the fact that this statement is not released to the accused's lawyers until the eve of the trial and that a lawyer is not allowed to be present during the taking of this statement. The police and prosecution essentially has its way with the accused before the defence even has a chance to breathe.
My greatest difficulty here is the erosion of the only effective legal defence against said statement - that the statement was obtained out of coercion. Case law has held that forcing the accused to sit on an ice block while blasting him with air conditioning is not coercion. It's also not coercion to deprive accused of food and drink for 9 hours.
I'm fairly sure that after this sort of treatment I'd have admitted to anything, even to things I didn't do. Especially if I wasn't advised on the consequences of my admission.
Conclusion
My point here is not to show that presumptions are per se bad. My point is that certain presumptions drafted under Singapore law are drafted or interpreted in a kiasu way. It captures more than what is necessary. It erodes safeguards to allow the convenience greater operation than is originally intended. Can we really afford to take shortcuts like this?
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Law
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Some Things Aren't To Be Shared
I've had a long talk with my wife this afternoon. It concerns our two beloved stuffed toys, Fluffy and Junior.
My wife loves them a lot, so much so that she wanted to write about their "antics" (kindly provided by yours truly) on a blog of their own.
I wasn't comfortable with this. To me, the antics were for her and her only. My special gift to her. The little secret we could both share. My wife didn't understand this at first - but she does now. For this reason, she's shutting down the blog.
My apologies for inconvenience caused
My wife loves them a lot, so much so that she wanted to write about their "antics" (kindly provided by yours truly) on a blog of their own.
I wasn't comfortable with this. To me, the antics were for her and her only. My special gift to her. The little secret we could both share. My wife didn't understand this at first - but she does now. For this reason, she's shutting down the blog.
My apologies for inconvenience caused
Celebrity Geeks II
In my recent D&D post, shortphat K commented:
Vin Diesel a D&D geek!?!?! damnn...next thing you know. Brad Pitt or some shit will be a legend of zelda fan
I didn't find any Legend of Zelda fans.
BUT...
I did find a hardcore Unreal Tournament player. You'll never guess who.
Eh! Not easy to find Asia Carrera picture with clothes on okay?!
How's that for investigative journalism?
Vin Diesel a D&D geek!?!?! damnn...next thing you know. Brad Pitt or some shit will be a legend of zelda fan
I didn't find any Legend of Zelda fans.
BUT...
I did find a hardcore Unreal Tournament player. You'll never guess who.
Eh! Not easy to find Asia Carrera picture with clothes on okay?!
How's that for investigative journalism?
Moving On
I've discovered today that there's no getting around some biases. That includes me. I'm so biased against people making use of me that the minute I even -think- that's happening to me, I give them the royal f-o.
That's it, I'm moving on.
That's it, I'm moving on.
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Saying Goodbye
Maturity is the process of looking at your past without the filter of nostalgia.
Last evening, I returned to my alma mater to have a sneak peek of their upcoming production, Camelot. I have a friend who's now teaching there. She was my junior in ACJC drama. She's now a teacher-in-charge. My old, greatly-loved Drama teacher-in-charge is still there, but with more white hair.
Things are a lot different now, after ten years and two renovations. The drama room where I spent many an hour rehearsing for Arthur Miller plays now looks like a dance studio. There's no more carpet to tear facial skin when we got too rough.
I looked at the cast. They are good. Boy are they good. Back when we were doing our first musical, we worked off the "two-out-of-three" principle. Meaning, if you could two out of the three of sing, dance or act, you're good enough for a lead role. Now, these actors and actresses can sing, dance and act. They are lovely too. All of them. Postively glowing with the radiance of youth. Arthur was charismatic enough to hold the entire stage by himself. I could hear, see, feel the strength of Guinevere's characterisation. 18 year olds are not supposed to be that talented.
It's not fair.
Yet, for a moment when I watched them rehearse, I felt drawn back to a time when I, too, was struggling with lifts, stretching out a cramp or starting from sratch yet again because someone missed a cue. I miss the days when the only tough decision I had to make was to whether to skip class.
Who'd have known, 10 years later, that I had to decide to skip Singapore altogether?
Eyes were on me when I went into that rehearsal. Not that many eyes - I was just one of many alumni that have walked in and out of rehearsals. I know they were wondering what in dickens I was doing there. Kids, I'm saying my goodbyes. I don't know you, but you are the successors of a legacy we worked very hard to build. And watching you at that rehearsal, I'm glad it's you. This place has no place for me now. I understand that now.
I promised to have dinner with my drama friend and my teacher-in-charge. As usual, rehersals ran late and there was another ticketing crisis. As I walked out, I hesitated, then walked out. I couldn't look back. If I looked back I would never leave.
I mouthed my silent goodbyes to the place that contained so many happy memories. Goodbye ACJC. I will miss you.
Postscript: I'm going to watch Camelot. It's shit-hot, if what I see at the rehersals is any indicator. Performance is 25 - 28 May, 8 p.m at the Centre of Performing Arts, ACS Barker. Tickets priced at Tickets: $50, $100 and $200. If anyone wants tickets, email me at khaycelim-at-hotmail-dot-com.
Last evening, I returned to my alma mater to have a sneak peek of their upcoming production, Camelot. I have a friend who's now teaching there. She was my junior in ACJC drama. She's now a teacher-in-charge. My old, greatly-loved Drama teacher-in-charge is still there, but with more white hair.
Things are a lot different now, after ten years and two renovations. The drama room where I spent many an hour rehearsing for Arthur Miller plays now looks like a dance studio. There's no more carpet to tear facial skin when we got too rough.
I looked at the cast. They are good. Boy are they good. Back when we were doing our first musical, we worked off the "two-out-of-three" principle. Meaning, if you could two out of the three of sing, dance or act, you're good enough for a lead role. Now, these actors and actresses can sing, dance and act. They are lovely too. All of them. Postively glowing with the radiance of youth. Arthur was charismatic enough to hold the entire stage by himself. I could hear, see, feel the strength of Guinevere's characterisation. 18 year olds are not supposed to be that talented.
It's not fair.
Yet, for a moment when I watched them rehearse, I felt drawn back to a time when I, too, was struggling with lifts, stretching out a cramp or starting from sratch yet again because someone missed a cue. I miss the days when the only tough decision I had to make was to whether to skip class.
Who'd have known, 10 years later, that I had to decide to skip Singapore altogether?
Eyes were on me when I went into that rehearsal. Not that many eyes - I was just one of many alumni that have walked in and out of rehearsals. I know they were wondering what in dickens I was doing there. Kids, I'm saying my goodbyes. I don't know you, but you are the successors of a legacy we worked very hard to build. And watching you at that rehearsal, I'm glad it's you. This place has no place for me now. I understand that now.
I promised to have dinner with my drama friend and my teacher-in-charge. As usual, rehersals ran late and there was another ticketing crisis. As I walked out, I hesitated, then walked out. I couldn't look back. If I looked back I would never leave.
I mouthed my silent goodbyes to the place that contained so many happy memories. Goodbye ACJC. I will miss you.
Postscript: I'm going to watch Camelot. It's shit-hot, if what I see at the rehersals is any indicator. Performance is 25 - 28 May, 8 p.m at the Centre of Performing Arts, ACS Barker. Tickets priced at Tickets: $50, $100 and $200. If anyone wants tickets, email me at khaycelim-at-hotmail-dot-com.
Friday, April 22, 2005
Everything I Needed to Know, I Learnt From D&D
Some further thoughts sparked off by Mc Dermott's post on infantilism and blogging. Since I promised a while back to blog about my gaming life, here it is.
I started playing Dungeons and Dragons since I was 7. I've spent two decades playing various Role-Playing Games (not that sort you perv!). I have played superheroes, barbarians, secret agents, post-apocalyptic survivors, wizards, martial artists and cowboys. I've dressed up like a vampire. I've developed a range of character voices, from cutesy to bloodcurdling.
I honestly maintain that the best part of me was taught to me from playing Role-Playing Games.
Be Yourself
When a person takes on a role, he's both creating and enacting a fictional character - but the moments of greatness in playing a character are always moments drawn from the self. Always. One cannot fake courage one does not have.
In "escaping" to a fantasy world, you gets to discover the depths of yourself. You'd be suprised with what you can find.
Endure. In Enduring Grow Strong.
One aspect of role-playing games I particularly like is the resolution of conflict. Degrees of success are resolved through the rolling of dice. Over 20 years, I've had some awesome rolls, I've had some awful rolls.
On days where things just do not go well for you, do what you can to survive. If you just give up because you've had a bad day, you will never have a second chance. So long as you survive you always have a chance to smack the BBEG ("Big Bad Evil Guy") silly.
One In A Million
Likewise, the nature of chance, in games and in real life, is that it's often fickle. Instead of bitching about it, take some chances. You never know. Whatever you're facing may not be as badass as you think it is. Or you may be more badass than you think you are. Or even better.
You might just be lucky.
Dragons Can Be Killed
This quote from GK Chesterton says it all.
"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already
know dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed".
Lastly...
You Can Play D&D...And Still Be Cool!
Betcha didn't know Vin Diesel is a D&D geek!
I started playing Dungeons and Dragons since I was 7. I've spent two decades playing various Role-Playing Games (not that sort you perv!). I have played superheroes, barbarians, secret agents, post-apocalyptic survivors, wizards, martial artists and cowboys. I've dressed up like a vampire. I've developed a range of character voices, from cutesy to bloodcurdling.
I honestly maintain that the best part of me was taught to me from playing Role-Playing Games.
Be Yourself
When a person takes on a role, he's both creating and enacting a fictional character - but the moments of greatness in playing a character are always moments drawn from the self. Always. One cannot fake courage one does not have.
In "escaping" to a fantasy world, you gets to discover the depths of yourself. You'd be suprised with what you can find.
Endure. In Enduring Grow Strong.
One aspect of role-playing games I particularly like is the resolution of conflict. Degrees of success are resolved through the rolling of dice. Over 20 years, I've had some awesome rolls, I've had some awful rolls.
On days where things just do not go well for you, do what you can to survive. If you just give up because you've had a bad day, you will never have a second chance. So long as you survive you always have a chance to smack the BBEG ("Big Bad Evil Guy") silly.
One In A Million
Likewise, the nature of chance, in games and in real life, is that it's often fickle. Instead of bitching about it, take some chances. You never know. Whatever you're facing may not be as badass as you think it is. Or you may be more badass than you think you are. Or even better.
You might just be lucky.
Dragons Can Be Killed
This quote from GK Chesterton says it all.
"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already
know dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed".
Lastly...
You Can Play D&D...And Still Be Cool!
Betcha didn't know Vin Diesel is a D&D geek!
"Me! Pick Me!"
Mc Dermott wrote in this blog posting that the Singapore blogosphere was infantile (as defined in wikipedia). In contrast, Mc Dermott cited Wannabe Lawyer and Singapore Commentator as mature blogs - presumably as blogging styles that he prefers over "infantile concerns or pulling silly faces".
I'd like to write this article to address two points that come to my mind after reading Mc Dermott's posting. These are points that Mc Dermott may or may not have implied - his posting isn't long enough and I'd be presumptious to presume too much. However, in stating his preference for a certain style when dealing with weighty issues, one might imply that he does not prefer toungue-in-cheek humour. Fair enough. I just ask that my readers consider these two points.
"The Name of the Rose" Argument
****WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD****
In Umberto Eco's novel "The Name of the Rose" (which I didn't read, I just watched the movie), Sean Connery was on the trail of a murderer with a terrible secret. The secret was a treatise authored by Aristotle on the value of humour.
In the climax of the movie, the murderer reveals his motivation for the murder. He wished for the treatise to remain concealed, as it undermines the foundation for religious obedience - authority.
My take is that a toungue-in-cheek approach to weighty Singaporean concerns is a lot more effective than a serious, weighty approach. It's all about approach. Using a serious, weighty approach virtually requires one takes on authority head on. In Singapore, that's a losing proposition. One will be sued, ignored and discredited, not necessarily in that order. Where's the effectiveness in that? Martyrdom? Even that doesn't work in Singapore.
Using humour, however, forces the authority to make a difficult choice - to either look foolish taking on the jester, to ignore the jester's message and grit their teeth at the grain of truth in the jests, or to laugh and be subverted.
Note: I'm not advancing an argument that effectiveness is a conscious consideration in choice of style. What we are seeing in the Singaporean Blogosphere may very well be Darwinian - the most effective bloggers occupying what is, in Singapore's blogosphere, the stablest ecological niche.
The "People vs Larry Flynt" Argument
****WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD****
Another famous movie quote, from the movie, "The People vs Larry Flynt".
"If you're going to treat me like a baby, I'm going to start acting like one." - Larry Flynt
This quote sums up a lot that's wrong with Singapore government policy. Some of the policies are -so- boneheaded and idiotic that the only response is to laugh or poke fun at the sheer absurdity of it all. The sheer all-pervasiveness of this bone-headedness drowns out concern for weighty issues - or Singapore bloggers just poke fun at it because it's so -easy-. Logical conclusion: refer to "The Name of the Rose" argument.
Conclusion
I believe that the Singapore blogosphere is a natural outgrowth of the socio-economic conditions in Singapore. I understand Mc Dermott's preference for a certain style, and even respect it. I know where my preferences lie.
Rock on, Singapore Bloggers!
Postscript: BigF**k's really well-written article here. Proof that first in time does not always prevail.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogosphere
I'd like to write this article to address two points that come to my mind after reading Mc Dermott's posting. These are points that Mc Dermott may or may not have implied - his posting isn't long enough and I'd be presumptious to presume too much. However, in stating his preference for a certain style when dealing with weighty issues, one might imply that he does not prefer toungue-in-cheek humour. Fair enough. I just ask that my readers consider these two points.
"The Name of the Rose" Argument
****WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD****
In Umberto Eco's novel "The Name of the Rose" (which I didn't read, I just watched the movie), Sean Connery was on the trail of a murderer with a terrible secret. The secret was a treatise authored by Aristotle on the value of humour.
In the climax of the movie, the murderer reveals his motivation for the murder. He wished for the treatise to remain concealed, as it undermines the foundation for religious obedience - authority.
My take is that a toungue-in-cheek approach to weighty Singaporean concerns is a lot more effective than a serious, weighty approach. It's all about approach. Using a serious, weighty approach virtually requires one takes on authority head on. In Singapore, that's a losing proposition. One will be sued, ignored and discredited, not necessarily in that order. Where's the effectiveness in that? Martyrdom? Even that doesn't work in Singapore.
Using humour, however, forces the authority to make a difficult choice - to either look foolish taking on the jester, to ignore the jester's message and grit their teeth at the grain of truth in the jests, or to laugh and be subverted.
Note: I'm not advancing an argument that effectiveness is a conscious consideration in choice of style. What we are seeing in the Singaporean Blogosphere may very well be Darwinian - the most effective bloggers occupying what is, in Singapore's blogosphere, the stablest ecological niche.
The "People vs Larry Flynt" Argument
****WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD****
Another famous movie quote, from the movie, "The People vs Larry Flynt".
"If you're going to treat me like a baby, I'm going to start acting like one." - Larry Flynt
This quote sums up a lot that's wrong with Singapore government policy. Some of the policies are -so- boneheaded and idiotic that the only response is to laugh or poke fun at the sheer absurdity of it all. The sheer all-pervasiveness of this bone-headedness drowns out concern for weighty issues - or Singapore bloggers just poke fun at it because it's so -easy-. Logical conclusion: refer to "The Name of the Rose" argument.
Conclusion
I believe that the Singapore blogosphere is a natural outgrowth of the socio-economic conditions in Singapore. I understand Mc Dermott's preference for a certain style, and even respect it. I know where my preferences lie.
Rock on, Singapore Bloggers!
Postscript: BigF**k's really well-written article here. Proof that first in time does not always prevail.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogosphere
Thursday, April 21, 2005
Almost Infamous III
Back to our regularly scheduled program - meaning I get to boast again about Singapore celebrities.
I first met Julie Wee when I returned to judge a number of debate competitions. Julie was one of the CHIJ debaters that went on to become one of ACJC's debate team members. I had only known her in passing at that time. It wasn't until a few years later, when we met again in a production of "Dead Poet's Society", that I really got to talk to her. She's an articulate, well brought-up lady, and good-looking to boot.
Proof that life is unfair.
Julie's got her own quirks though. She's an avowed vegetarian, and she's pretty vocal about her beliefs. The cynics among us will note that she's a debater, which is synonymous with being vocal about everything.
So one day, while we spent yet another late night rehearsing for "Dead Poets Society", Julie, Glen and I settled down for dinner. Since it was mass "tar-pau" (takeout), it was your standard meat-vegetables-rice in styrofoam boxes. Which Julie promptly started to pick at. Being an avowed carnivore, I proceeded to ask her about the meat.
The conversation between us went something like this.
Me: So what's the deal with the meat?
Julie: Oh I'm vegetarian.
Me: Don't mind me asking, but why are you vegetarian? I know a couple and I like to find out why.
Julie: Yeah, lots of people ask me that. It's a couple of reasons really. The first is that I think it's cruel.
[Long discussion ensues]
Julie: Actually, it's also because I don't like the taste of meat.
Me: But your boyfriend eats meat.
Julie: Right. Cos it's his choice.
[Long Pause]
Me: So...if you kiss your boyfriend...
Julie: WHOA! What's with the third degree here?!
I first met Julie Wee when I returned to judge a number of debate competitions. Julie was one of the CHIJ debaters that went on to become one of ACJC's debate team members. I had only known her in passing at that time. It wasn't until a few years later, when we met again in a production of "Dead Poet's Society", that I really got to talk to her. She's an articulate, well brought-up lady, and good-looking to boot.
Proof that life is unfair.
Julie's got her own quirks though. She's an avowed vegetarian, and she's pretty vocal about her beliefs. The cynics among us will note that she's a debater, which is synonymous with being vocal about everything.
So one day, while we spent yet another late night rehearsing for "Dead Poets Society", Julie, Glen and I settled down for dinner. Since it was mass "tar-pau" (takeout), it was your standard meat-vegetables-rice in styrofoam boxes. Which Julie promptly started to pick at. Being an avowed carnivore, I proceeded to ask her about the meat.
The conversation between us went something like this.
Me: So what's the deal with the meat?
Julie: Oh I'm vegetarian.
Me: Don't mind me asking, but why are you vegetarian? I know a couple and I like to find out why.
Julie: Yeah, lots of people ask me that. It's a couple of reasons really. The first is that I think it's cruel.
[Long discussion ensues]
Julie: Actually, it's also because I don't like the taste of meat.
Me: But your boyfriend eats meat.
Julie: Right. Cos it's his choice.
[Long Pause]
Me: So...if you kiss your boyfriend...
Julie: WHOA! What's with the third degree here?!
Blog Justice
Okay, will whoever who stole Linda's phone -please- just own up and return the phone? Before the lynch mob forms? Please?
Employment Raw
Disclaimer: This article contains a discussion of a legal nature. Please do not take this article as legal advice - it's not meant to be.
The ever-vigilant Acidflask noted a first in Singapore Blog history - retracted statements about a workplace superior. On his blog, Acidflask poses interesting questions on the line between "freedom of expression and professional reticence". All very good questions. Unfortunately....
Acidflask, privacy a non-issue in Singapore. Here, an employee's right to privacy simply doesn't exist in any meaningful form. Micro$oft's stand on this topic is not uncommon by far.
I know companies in which bosses read their employee's email (legal in Singapore). It's also common HR practice in Singapore to have an employer ask for the release of results from a health screening. (again, no legal prohibition). Either of these practices would be proscribed or outright prohibited in some jurisdictions.
Privacy just isn't respected in Singapore. Granted, there are many laws that protect privacy of individuals indirectly, but there is no generally recognised right of privacy in Singapore. The indirect nature of the protection of privacy leads occasionally to absurd results.
Take employers snooping on employee's email inboxes for example. The law protects employers, but not employees. Employees cannot read their employer's emails without getting smacked silly by the Singapore justice system. This particular peversity of the law lies in the application of the Computer Misuse Act (Cap 50A). The Computer Misuse Act only prosecutes "unauthorised" access of computers. Without going into the nuts and bolts of the Computer Misuse Act, it is sufficient to say that a person who has the authority to control access to a computer, arguably, commits no offence under the Computer Misuse Act. It doesn't take a genius to see how this inequality can be exploited by unethical employers.
I respect the fact that the Singapore Gah-men is trying very hard implement best practices without eroding their traditionally pro-employer stand. The results, however, usually come out half-arsed - if they come out at all. According to this report data protection legislation has been under review for 14 years (the report says 12 years, but it was published in 2003). I have serious doubts that this will ever be enacted into legislation.
Hence, Acidflask, you give very good advice. When blogging, assume that anyone can read it and regulate accordingly.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Privacy
The ever-vigilant Acidflask noted a first in Singapore Blog history - retracted statements about a workplace superior. On his blog, Acidflask poses interesting questions on the line between "freedom of expression and professional reticence". All very good questions. Unfortunately....
Acidflask, privacy a non-issue in Singapore. Here, an employee's right to privacy simply doesn't exist in any meaningful form. Micro$oft's stand on this topic is not uncommon by far.
I know companies in which bosses read their employee's email (legal in Singapore). It's also common HR practice in Singapore to have an employer ask for the release of results from a health screening. (again, no legal prohibition). Either of these practices would be proscribed or outright prohibited in some jurisdictions.
Privacy just isn't respected in Singapore. Granted, there are many laws that protect privacy of individuals indirectly, but there is no generally recognised right of privacy in Singapore. The indirect nature of the protection of privacy leads occasionally to absurd results.
Take employers snooping on employee's email inboxes for example. The law protects employers, but not employees. Employees cannot read their employer's emails without getting smacked silly by the Singapore justice system. This particular peversity of the law lies in the application of the Computer Misuse Act (Cap 50A). The Computer Misuse Act only prosecutes "unauthorised" access of computers. Without going into the nuts and bolts of the Computer Misuse Act, it is sufficient to say that a person who has the authority to control access to a computer, arguably, commits no offence under the Computer Misuse Act. It doesn't take a genius to see how this inequality can be exploited by unethical employers.
I respect the fact that the Singapore Gah-men is trying very hard implement best practices without eroding their traditionally pro-employer stand. The results, however, usually come out half-arsed - if they come out at all. According to this report data protection legislation has been under review for 14 years (the report says 12 years, but it was published in 2003). I have serious doubts that this will ever be enacted into legislation.
Hence, Acidflask, you give very good advice. When blogging, assume that anyone can read it and regulate accordingly.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Privacy
Flogging Dead Horses
In grand tradition of this blog's rehasing of old news, I'm pleased to report that tomorrow.sg is up and running. Check it out. It's tres chic. Brings a tear to my eye, it does.
Got Gilat Banner all!
Kudos to the Singapore Blog Mafia (Mr Brown, Mr Miyagi, Adri, and Xiaxue) for giving us poor orphaned blogs a home. :D
Postscript: I just realised what a douche-bag I've been. Just to clarify I am the one flogging the dead horse here by reporting Tomorrow as being up and running. Tomorrow does not flog any horses, dead or alive. Or at least, I don't think it does.
Post-Postscript: No horses have been harmed in the production of this blog post.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogosphere
Got Gilat Banner all!
Kudos to the Singapore Blog Mafia (Mr Brown, Mr Miyagi, Adri, and Xiaxue) for giving us poor orphaned blogs a home. :D
Postscript: I just realised what a douche-bag I've been. Just to clarify I am the one flogging the dead horse here by reporting Tomorrow as being up and running. Tomorrow does not flog any horses, dead or alive. Or at least, I don't think it does.
Post-Postscript: No horses have been harmed in the production of this blog post.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogosphere
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
"That's 'Social Escort' to You!"
First, we have news that the Singapore Gah-Men is going ahead with the casino. Then, we have to deal with the fact that it's now two casinos, not one.
Now, we have to deal with a "Gah-Men" that's not honest enough to call a spade a spade. "Integrated Resort" indeed. Hmmph.
Perhaps it should read "Integrated Resort Royale"?
On the same vein, prostitutes are really "Ejaculation Service Assistants". The services provided are "Faux Reproduction Engineering" And when all is said and done, once he/she is forced to make ends meet, he/she isn't cast in a porno flick. Oh no.
He/she stars in an "Artistic Film".
My primary contention here is this. We're apparently mature enough to have a casino in Singapore but not mature enough to have the words with ugly connotations discussed in public. If we are mature enough, make the facts available to us. Show us the consultation papers. Show us the statistics. Show us the proof that 35,000 jobs will be created, and that these jobs go to Singaporeans.
Money where my mouth is? Definitely.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Casino
Now, we have to deal with a "Gah-Men" that's not honest enough to call a spade a spade. "Integrated Resort" indeed. Hmmph.
Perhaps it should read "Integrated Resort Royale"?
On the same vein, prostitutes are really "Ejaculation Service Assistants". The services provided are "Faux Reproduction Engineering" And when all is said and done, once he/she is forced to make ends meet, he/she isn't cast in a porno flick. Oh no.
He/she stars in an "Artistic Film".
My primary contention here is this. We're apparently mature enough to have a casino in Singapore but not mature enough to have the words with ugly connotations discussed in public. If we are mature enough, make the facts available to us. Show us the consultation papers. Show us the statistics. Show us the proof that 35,000 jobs will be created, and that these jobs go to Singaporeans.
Money where my mouth is? Definitely.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Casino
Fear Factor Boot Camp
For those of you catching Fear Factor on 18 April, you'd have caught Allan Wu slugging down 21 shots of a vile maggot/rotten fish eyes/I-blanked-out blend. You might recognise him. He's a TCS 8 star, and one of very few effectively billingual stars TCS has.
For his final stunt, our dear Mr Wu got to surf on a platform swung around by a helicopter.
Steady Boh?!
Eh not bad man. Looks like all that training with Fann Wong and Christopher Lee in NKF Charity Shows came in handy. Pity he didn't win the US$50,000.
For his final stunt, our dear Mr Wu got to surf on a platform swung around by a helicopter.
Steady Boh?!
Eh not bad man. Looks like all that training with Fann Wong and Christopher Lee in NKF Charity Shows came in handy. Pity he didn't win the US$50,000.
Public Service Annoucement
Apocalyptic Wen has a job interview. It may turn into a job offer. A permanent one. One he likes.
Please refrain from taking planes and holidays for the next month or so. Don't say I didn't warn you.
God help us all.
Please refrain from taking planes and holidays for the next month or so. Don't say I didn't warn you.
God help us all.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Zen and the Art of Blogging
"toysrevil", a commentator on Cowboy Caleb's post on the errant, allegedly-racist PSC scholar wrote briefly on the ideology of blogging.
He/she wrote:
"but the irony being, we bloggers (dare i claim association to that? :p) understand the “idealogy of blogging” (or i’d like to think so) - but say the average reader who doesn’t give two-hoots about blogging might think differently and mayhaps perverse said thoughts and content to their own contention? im not saying “them or us”, but in the end, a snitch/whistlebower is either oblivious to it all or just out for blood. IMHO"
No, toysrevil, I don't dare claim association to being a blogger either. If I get traffic spikes it is only because I stand on the shoulders of giants. Or powerhouses. Whatever.
However, I think I know where you are coming from, toysrevil. I believe I know where Cheng Zan is coming from too. I only started this blog fairly recently. My old blog was primarily a venting-ground for thoughts that needed to see light of day - no matter the cost. Like Cheng Zan, I thought no one would read it.
Boy was I wrong.
I didn't get into trouble because of it - not in the same way and extent Cheng Zan did. But I did piss people off. I learnt from that incident that the minute you put something online, you must be prepared for the consequences. At it's heart, I don't see a blog as any different a medium of communication than, say, an email or a conversation. In fact, I consider blogging to be less private than a conversation or an email. An article I read likened posting words on the Internet to casting ashes into an ocean: you may control the source, but you'll never know where it will end up.
On the Internet, anonymity is a double-edged sword. Would you trust the honour of someone anonymous to protect the secrecy of your innermost thoughts? I didn't think so. It doesn't matter if you're posting anonymously - someone will know who you are. You may not know who that someone is.
In short: blog, have fun, vent, but be prepared to be responsible for everything you write.
Everything.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogging, Privacy
He/she wrote:
"but the irony being, we bloggers (dare i claim association to that? :p) understand the “idealogy of blogging” (or i’d like to think so) - but say the average reader who doesn’t give two-hoots about blogging might think differently and mayhaps perverse said thoughts and content to their own contention? im not saying “them or us”, but in the end, a snitch/whistlebower is either oblivious to it all or just out for blood. IMHO"
No, toysrevil, I don't dare claim association to being a blogger either. If I get traffic spikes it is only because I stand on the shoulders of giants. Or powerhouses. Whatever.
However, I think I know where you are coming from, toysrevil. I believe I know where Cheng Zan is coming from too. I only started this blog fairly recently. My old blog was primarily a venting-ground for thoughts that needed to see light of day - no matter the cost. Like Cheng Zan, I thought no one would read it.
Boy was I wrong.
I didn't get into trouble because of it - not in the same way and extent Cheng Zan did. But I did piss people off. I learnt from that incident that the minute you put something online, you must be prepared for the consequences. At it's heart, I don't see a blog as any different a medium of communication than, say, an email or a conversation. In fact, I consider blogging to be less private than a conversation or an email. An article I read likened posting words on the Internet to casting ashes into an ocean: you may control the source, but you'll never know where it will end up.
On the Internet, anonymity is a double-edged sword. Would you trust the honour of someone anonymous to protect the secrecy of your innermost thoughts? I didn't think so. It doesn't matter if you're posting anonymously - someone will know who you are. You may not know who that someone is.
In short: blog, have fun, vent, but be prepared to be responsible for everything you write.
Everything.
Technorati Tags: Singapore, Blogging, Privacy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
