good man is a bad man?

well, when i was in cameron highlands, i was offline for 3 days. suddenly when i came back, and went online on sunday night (18 sept), i caught this big news that had been going around in the blogsphere – peter tan turning into a blog buster (as per what the paper, malay mail, put it… but blog buster? is he busting the blogs or people who made comments?)… making a police report over a certain comment left by somone calling himself as ‘good man’, because the comment was deemed seditious.

well, ‘good man’ did not only make the comment at peter tan’s blog but also others. read politics101 post to find out who. politics101 also had a post with the comments of ‘good man’ here. but to get a better read of ‘good man’s comments, try going to some other bloggers as mentioned by politics101, esp. kahsoon and under9, where the comments had not been deleted off yet.

and of course, we had the most influential blogger, jeff ooi blogging about this issue too peter tan turns blog buster, another blog buster and bloggers lodge police report.

now, i will not make my comments here but instead i will copy the comments i made in jeff ooi’s blog and the PPS blog to paste here. don’t worry, it’s not a copy and paste job (which, anyway, i don’t see why some bloggers seem to complain and make so much hoo-haa over it) since those are my very own comments.

——–
from jeff’s blog ‘bloggers lodge police report‘.

i echo together with viceice ‘amen’ to beagle’s view. fully agree with him/her, and also to viceice’s view in peter’s blog.

the thing i find puzzling is how come a few people judge for everyone that a particular person’s comments is ‘irresponsible’? not everyone may find the comment irresponsible, but even so yes or no, they’ll be matured enough just to read it and let it be done with, and NOT be so immatured to be ‘incited’ by the comment.

another thing is also i find that there are too many self-righteous people out there who are living in a rose tinted world. they feel that because we of all races should be friends with one another, it means there shouldn’t be any negative remarks on each other’s race/religion. we make just one little negative remark and poof!! they will say we are trying to create disharmony. of course preferably we shouldn’t but when a remark is made, whether true or not true, most of the time we made it not with the intention of creating disharmony. unfortunately self-righteous persons can’t see that.

the same example also goes for when people criticise the country. just a little criticisms, self-righteous people jumped up at you saying you don’t love the country.

*sigh*

——–
from the PPS blog ‘troll buster in action for the good of all‘.

i agree with chez and freedie… and also viveice who made a comment in peter’s blog.

i was thinking too on the part of who decided that what was written was ‘irresponsible’. are we suppose to judge for everyone that, eg, oh, his comments will incite racial hatred, so drastic action need to be taken.

it’s like when we complain so much about the movie censorship, where the censorship board snipped off kissing scenes and voilent scene. we complained so much like we are matured enough to handle those scenes, it won’t affect us so much so that we also resort to voilence and so on.

then some comments appears which YOU deem irresponsible, but what about others? they may not find anything wrong with the comments at all, or they read it and they are matured enough NOT to believe in it or not to get ‘incited’ by it. even if there IS someting terribly wrong with the comments, it is only HIS OWN opinion, and he is entitled to it, and yes like what freddie pointed out, discredit him through cogent argument or consensus and not taking drastic actions.

we are already shut off from reading people’s opinion freely expressed in the mainstream media and we don’t want that to happen in the blogosphere or internet in general.