You are correct.

This is the absolute worst. EVARRRRRRR

ah fu ginn. the teacher got the class to write a letter to ST Forum lor. all letters would hav to be submitted no matter how lousy it is. then most of us dunno wat to write on so we wrote crap, write for the sake of writing, which resulted in a not-up-to-standard letter. apparently his letter got published. blame the editor for publishing it la haha.

Haha. Just another example of how a teacher's zealousness to get his student's letter published turns into a public joke.

It's so funny ok?

wtf?!? LOL.

i bet the poor boy is hiding under his blanket right now.

I guess one should just have tiddlywinks festivals...
Singaporeist | SGFilm

Haha. Lousy ST forum editor, of all letters choose that.

I catch no ball... seriously!

Brennan = One who shoots himself in the foot.

mayb we shld ban football in the schools as well, i almost hit a pregnant teacher once with a football ...

Linus' Daily Antics

There's nothing wrong with the letter - it's just not the kind of letter that is of decent enough quality to be published. Hence, it's not the writer of the letter that should be shot, it is the editor of ST making the decision to publish the letter that should be shot.

talking about football.. there were a few incidents of people dying while playing football in singapore... ban football loh

people die from smoking.. ban smoking loh
people die from drinking.. ban drinking loh
people die from eating.. ban eating loh
people die while sleeping.. ban sleeping loh
people die while performing national service.. WHY NOT BAN NATIONAL SERVICE??

crap

*applause*

ST forum editor should be shot. poor judgement, as usual no qc (as noticed from all the fallacious falsehoods from family type groups on sex, aids, celebacy, condoms)..

Maybe it's part of the ST's way of trying to appear to be more open to public response!!!!11oneoneomg

Must... resist... urge... to... satirize...

Oops.

Agagooga, thanks for drawing attn to tt letter.
When I saw the letter last week, I felt like writing a response... but sigh. too lazy.

I'm glad that most people see the problems in Cheong's reasoning.
(Is he really a kid writing for school work? if so, then can't blame him lah, just some retarded ST forum editor.)

"too dangerous for singaporeans"? why? because singaporeans are handicapped pussies?
Gahmen should ban any activity that is dangerous? Because sg-peasants are too stupid to take care of themselves? Skydiving is only for ang-moh? because ang-moh better are such things ya?

In terms of fatalities per participant, skydiving is safer than lots of other sports. SCUBA for example, which is so mainstream these days.

Webpages with stats:
http://www.afn.org/skydive/sta/stats.html
http://www.uspa.org/about/page2/relative_safety.htm
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/

I love skydiving and gahmen should not be interfering with how people choose to have fun.

(i tried posting on agagooga's but kept seeing "Error: your template does not contain space for all fields. Please redo your template, closely following the instructions")

Oops. I think the server was having problems. Maybe because too many people were spamming my comments box ;)

Agagooga kena flamed by little kids who accuse him of being tEh gAy & hAvInG nO lIfE. (And by default, us too). *rolls eyes*

"hahahahha GAY with no life XD"
"u are LOSERRRRRRRRR :D "
"yaaaaa. to put down others simply shows that you feel inferior to them. well, u ARE inferior. u are NUBz (: at least he got published, let's see u try, big shot :O:O"

Now I remember why I hate secondary schoolkids. These 'kids' wouldn't know a decent local blog if it hit them smack between the eyes.

P.S. I've always felt that if one does not have the intention of writing a proper letter with actual complaints and/or feedback, then one should not bother writing to the Forum at all. Obviously a lot of the flamers have missed this point entirely.

Trackback from Balderdash:

If this was not the case, I express my apologies, though I still think that it is the worst letter ever....

Fu Ginn's blog
http://cfg1008.bravejournal.com/
:)

There are two issues on the table:
(1) ST's editorial discretion when it comes to publishing (online or in the hardcopy newspaper) forum letters.
(2) The strength of the argument in Cheong's letter.

In labelling Cheong's letter " Worst. Straits Times Forum letter. Ever.", it would seem that Agagooga is more concerned with the second issue than the first. Even though Cheong did not call for a blanket ban on skydiving, his argument is: Skydiving is dangerous because people have died in skydiving accidents. Therefore, skydiving "is too dangerous a recreational activity to be made available to the people."

Pointing out the flaws in this argument (and not the person) is not uncalled for. It's just an intelligent response to a flawed argument. I agree that personal attacks are unconstructive and unnecessary, but there's no reason to say that one cannot criticise another's argument (again, not the person, particularly when that argument was voluntarily submitted and published on a public platform.

As for the issue of privacy, it is ST's policy to require writers to identify themselves fully, and one I totally agree with (even though I agree with very little else of ST's editorial policy) because people who wish to express an opinion in a public forum should stand up and be counted, not hide behind anonymity. In the internet age, it's true that revealing one's identity may easily lead to all sorts of personal information being turned up with a quick Google search. But that's a risk that all ST Forum letter-writers deal with, and judging by the torrent of letters they receive each day, I don't think it's an obstacle to people expressing their honest views.

I agree with what you said; that one can criticise another's argument.
look at the link to http://gssq.blogspot.com/2005/09/this-must-take-cake-for-worst.html
Which line there is constructive criticism? Most if not all of it is in a mocking tone.
It quotes: "cheong fu ginns pathetic attempt" and "amateurish and primary school composition tone."
Yup, people can criticise all they want. But as a response to Cheong's article, whatever Agaooga posted was as "amateurish", if not more than, as the article itself. I can see completely no point in it other than to put the article down and to rubbish it.
I certainly do not think it "an intelligent response". Perhaps you can enlighten me as to what was the purpose of linking his "criticism" on this website, giving it greater exposure. I would rather call it bashing of the article.

I guess that most people when they read the letter they would assume that the author meant what he said. Rather than, as with most school children writing school compositions, writing for the sake of having something written. So most people unless they know the whole story assume that the letter writer assumes responsibility for what's written, it's only natural.

It seems that agagooga was closer to the mark than he realised when he criticised the letter for being amateurish and schoolboyish.

There is a third dimension to this problem that wasn't mentioned earlier: why did the teacher have to send all of the letters to the forum? Whose dumb ass idea was it?

I blame first the forum editor for publishing such a moronic letter. Then I blame the teacher for sending school assignments to that building down the road. The teacher could have assumed that the forum editor would do the decent thing and not publish such half baked ideas, but the buck stops with the editor.

Just because ideas are not expressed in a congenial tone does not make than non-constructive criticism. Those commenters pointed out the flaws in his argument, rather than making ad hominem remarks about his character.

I put down the letter because at the time I thought it deserved to be put down as it was the pits and thought it symbolised a lot of what was wrong with the ST and Singaporeans. Is there anything wrong with that?

Honestly, I can't see any point, expressed in whatever tone you like, that is constructive there. Maybe you would like to quote it?
The whole post is merely trying to mock it.
Calling it the worst letter ever doesn't help, nor does talking about parodying it.
Comments B and C helps in what manner again?
As for comment A, perhaps the "primary school composition tone."
How does a single disparaging description help?
You may certainly put down anything you find interesting - after all it seems you are an editor of this site.
But after knowing the context in which this letter was written, and looking at the responses elicited by those reading it, no matter what your intentions were, the end result is that Mr Cheong's letter is being flamed unnecessarily. If that was not your original intention, something has gone wrong here. And badly.

You might be interested to know that I have since put up a post clarifying the situation.

There are hundreds and thousands of uneducated and elderly out there who are unable to write well. Do you scorn them?
No matter what, unconstructive criticism is deplorable.
I feel that you should make a post clarifiying what is wrong. Your post, containing mockery, has led to comments posted on the site in an equal spirit of mockery and insult. You cannot be responsible for responses to the letter, but you are responsible for publishing it here and inciting disdain through your post.
My message to all is:
Think about it; the real reason making you feel disdainful is not the poor quality of the letter, but the fact that it got into the ST Forum, and direct your opinions in the right way. It reflects lack of thought and consideration that people insult the letter directly without considering what actually deserves criticism.

Hmm sorry for the repetition. I thought my previous reply had been lost due to some problems in internet connection, and thus sent a short reply on my thoughts again. Sorry about that.

Trackback from Forum-letter writing too risky for S’poreans:

I believe that writing forum letters is too dangerous a civic activity to be made available to the people.

Even the safety of professionals cannot be guaranteed, let alone the people new to the art....

You are a bunch of pathetic people (adults, no less), trying argue with someone who is supposedly a young boy.

Firstly, why shouldn't his views be heard in the forum? Perhaps his arguments aren't well articulated but he deserves to have his concerns aired. Take it as what it is, a young Singaporean providing his view on Singaporean matters. Secondly, how many of you have actually written a letter to the forum, and did you do so when you were young? You go on and on about the school system being crap, yet criticise a teacher for doing something which teachers don't normally do. Obviously you ppl think that kids should be seen and not heard, something you were perhaps subject to when young.
Perhaps if someone had listened to you when you were young you might actually be making a difference to Singapore now.

Assuming that it wasn't a school assignment in the first place,

The Forum is supposed to have thoughtful, incisive content, rather than letters for the sake of having letters. Forum letters are meant to be an open invitation for discussion, and discussing his letter is indeed what we are doing.

And more of us have written to the Forum than you might think. Just because letters don't get published does not mean that they don't get written.

This has nothing to do with suppressing young people's opinions just because of their origin. Whether the writer is 15 years old, 35 years old or 50 years old we would be equally disdainful of the letter's content. Indeed, all of us thought it was the work of an adult in the first place, ergo the scorn. The fact that it was written by a "kid" (your word) and under duress makes us more forgiving, on the contrary.

If the teacher is the one who submitted the letters on behalf on his students, then he/she should be the one held completely responsible, rather than even the ST forum editor.

The additional fact that he/she offers full marks for any letter making into the Straits Times is one of the craziest things I have heard in education. (after the Ayam Brand blogging)

Cheers,
Hou.

Trackback from A Letter to the Forum:

"Hello, how many prestigious all-boys schools can you find in the Ang Mo Kio-Bishan area? But one must be understanding, and know that he cannot reveal his school name. It would totally ruin the secrecy of it all!"...

I am a frequent ST Forum writer and would like to give you my thoughts on the above matters.

I recently attented the ST Forum Letter writers' get-together at the SPH News Centre and was lucky to have gotten the opportunity to meet the Forum Editor and the ST editor himself. All letters that are considered for publication are thoroughly gone through for sensitivity and decided on a very much public-interest basis.

The Forum editor himself has clarified that he does not select letters with regard as to whether it would hurt relationships with the paper's advertisers, but strictly on a public-interest basis.

I should think we should trust the Forum editor to do his job well as the ST editor believes in. We must also appreciate that all letters published in the print and interactive versions have gone through intensive editing, to ensure that all content publish for ST's 1.3 million readers are in plain, correct English.

Oh please don't assume that just because someone has the "Editor" tag on his name card that it makes him any smarter than the rest of us. The ST Forum Editor happens to be an IDIOT. So for those of you wondering why the standard of letters has been worse than usual, its because of this guy who only came in a year or so ago.