People with nothing to do but criticize another's pain. Back off and get ure own lives in order or mind your own bloody business. If you can't help nor give constructive advice. than seriously dun add on to someone elses already painful existence. Heartless PIGS
Typical Singaporean callousness. Feel free to argue this if u have nothing better to do. My email is posted

no photos..

issit just me or what?

i dont see any bloody photos?!?

It has been taken off already .... -_-

We need an exorcist here.

Those blood looked delicious! Yummy!

SHE IS A SATANIST LAH! LOOK AT HER LINKS! IN FACT EDITORS SHOULD REMOVE THIS, YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO BE CHARGED FOR SPREADING OCCULT BELIEFS.

AND I'M NOT CHRISTIAN MIND YOU.

That's the frickin anti-christ! Now where's beowulf when we need him most?!

And yea I think she took down the pics.. y'know how I was a lil skeptical at the non-swelling of the skin around them stitches.. must be fake.

beowulf has turned goth.
he was last seen trying to squeeze into a lolita outfit

Repent now! Everybody, the sinner's prayer...

Has she taken that post down? I did not see any gruesome blood.

I don't think this is a suicide blog. It looks more like a Satanism promoting blog. Managed to catch a glimpse of the blog owner's 'suicide' photos. I personally think she's not trying to kill herself, maybe she's doing a satanism ritual.

I may be wrong also. This is just my opinion.

stop mentioning "satan" so many times, you are giving beowulf a woody. he fancies himself as the new age charlemagne

>>I think this will serve to shock people and lead people to saying "OMG that's stupid, look at all the blood!" Instead of encouraging people to do it as well.<<

thanx, Barffiebrabrablackbark. you're one of the few who are sane enough to step back and consider other possibilities. we need more people like you who don't just give predictable knee-jerk reactions, who are so quick to judge and condemn.

i publish this for a mature-minded audience, even though there are obviously plenty of immature ones who misunderstand.

Ok ok. Now was my reaction a knee-jerk one? Did I just go off my bonkers and went accusing everyone of OH GOTH! WTF SATANIST?

I don't think so.

Actually, I do appreciate you bringing up such things. There's a lack of exposure on alternative cultures here. Though multi-cultural diversity is present, in some sense, diversity is still very much absent.

I myself tend towards that side at times. I'm like her, but I just don't do self mutilating.

Anyway, back to the point. I was just thinking whether would it be appropriate for such articles since we do have a minor audience who are at times incapable of mature thinking you know?

Ok, I see brickbats coming again.

You do have your motive in publishing it, but I had my motive in giving my stand as well.

Cheers.

A cry for attention.

If she wanted to kill herself for real she would have slit her wrists diagonally, so that the arteries are difficult to repair, and sank into a hot bathtub.

Well, last check, the owner of the blog had take down those pictures. Her reaction shows she is not doing it for fame. We have seen many good discussion! Let wish her all the best. It could be good for her to know there are many strangers out here wish her well.

Pseudonym-impersonator is right in some facts. But self mutilating does not equate to suicide. Inherently, the title of this is even wrong. They are not suicidal, it's just that they have severe psychatric problems, just so to generalise.

However, by letting it be Tomorrow-ed, the editors have failed in their social responsibility, in their responsibility to the public. So what if blogs are public? So what if this is an aggregator of Singaporean blogs?

As editors, you have the responsiblity of showcasing blogs that are of relevance to the community. Granted, you might have the issue of diversity and of raising this mutilation issue to the public. But did you consider the backlash? Have you considered the issue of minors? What if they attempt in a mimicry of Jeanseductive? Are you going to be responsible for them?

And no sane people will engage in such things? Oh boy, you haven't seen the rest of what sane people are capable enough of.

"Not happy, don't read," you may argue. But given that they are minors, they are impressionable and mouldable. So what if you, tinkertailor, say you do not endorse it? You have already given it free publicity, and in a warped sense, that is already endorsement enough.

danb, time for you to supply more mammas to surf with the kids.

Why, yours dead?

if you need someone to babysit your internet surfing, there exists software for that purpose. parents should use them too. how is this the responsibility of the editors of this meta-blog?

do you mean to say that tomorrow.sg should only showcase good and happy blogs? your sentiment smacks of regimes like north korea, where people are forced to sing songs of happiness and content even while millions starve.

while we are at it, how about sinkapore create a new branch of the police force to make sure people tie their shoelaces correctly? it won't do to have someone trip over their undone laces and fall down, or worse, knock others down in the process of falling.

remember, we are sinkaporeans, a nation of compranging babies who need the gahmen to take care of us every step of the way.

aiyah ... let this people do what they want lah~
you might think that i'm being selfish and self-centered~
but that's life, and we're not gonna last forever~
dunno how many kezillion people in the world~
this type of thing sure to happen one lah~~
don't like don't see loh~

wah! now editors to blame ah? what nonsense! people have been comitting suicide before the internet exist, even before electricity exist. before wheels existed even. wake up your idea man! the only person to blame is the person wanting to comit suicide. remember hor, blog is public. the issue has been beaten to death.

to editors: perhaps please exercise sense of responsibility, considering the memetic and mimetic reactions that often stem from representations of suicide and suicide attempts. yes, these things are real and these things are out there, but we all have a role to play to limit exposure and even (veiled) valourisation of suicidal tendencies.

Limit exposure?

Why don't you just get momma to surf the net with you?

she can't. she cut her wrist.

I think we can feature her in Lifeline to make the show more exciting ...

I think it is pretty obvious that some weird guy here is shadowing sie teo cho, posting silly comments under his name.

Well, I was saying that just because Singaporeans express negative sentiments about this doesn't mean we are sheltered.

Yeah, she could have serious issues, but don't you think it would help her if we told her to think of the more important things in life? And that she should look at her problems with perspective? That's better than molly coddling her.

how can someone impersonate a pseudonym? sieteocho isn't even his real name. he refuses to supply any personal information pertaining to his true identity on his blog. he hides his identity to the point of paranoia. how then is it possible to shadow this pseudonym of an individual who doesn't even exist?

That didn't make much sense. But then again, neither do most of your comments

thank you

OMFG. she's a MOTHER! Talk about some people who ought never to have children!

Sorry adding to the above, she is a mighty waste of space. So if she doesn't finish herself off I hope someone else will.

She seriously needs psychiatric help. Seriously. Not a a danger to herself but a danger to the society at large. Locking her up also no point. Either psychiatric help or go quickly finish herself by hurling down towards the path of an oncoming MRT train. Even castrating her also no point.

People like her are no different from bulimics or sufferers of aneroxia nervosa.

Seeing that at least the flame trolls have subsided, I think I can make a judgemental view of the situation:

1. The blogger-in-question (all '-in-question' henceforth will be acronymised(sp?) as 'IQ') is engaging in a somewhat controversial lifestyle. I don't necessarily want to condemn or condone her actions. To each his/her own.
2. Of course, there are minors who will come to this metablog and click on that blog. Unless the minor-IQ has a really troubled childhood to the point of gullibility to emulate the blogger-IQ, no sane minor will want to cut their wrists for the fun of it.
3. I don't believe it's for fame, though she was doing it "for the fun of it." (My opinion). If it were a suicide attempt the law would've been reached onto her by now (is it? I was thinking that the handcuffs on her pictures made me think that she's also into another hobby of torturous nature.)

I'm happy that this is brought up. Open up my mind, btw.

thanx TP for your comments. i wish there were more enlightened individuals like you around.

You're right. So does anyone here believe that's it's real? You mean the police would allow you to take pics of your bleedin handcuff'd self?

The problem with not adopting the flamers' stand by giving coherent and logical thoughts, is that they will come and flame you for it. For adopting a "Mighter and Holier than Thou" stand, which we are not.

Just take a look at sieteocho's comments if you need an example. Some are coherent, granted. I'll give you that. But others? I leave it to your imagination.

And if we say they are being judgemental and stereotypical, then the argument of being uptight and "Victorian-esque" and "where is the humour" gets shot back at you.

Therein lies the fault of this metablog, no moderation in flamebaiting and trolling. And don't get started on the censorship argument. I'm talking about moderation in "flamebaiting" here, not politcally incorrect statements.

As long as comments are constructive, I don't bloody give a hoot as to whether are they correct or not.

Unless this metablog serves to be an avenue for flamewars and trolling. Even forum owners have much more sense than to allow trolling or such.

Editors, your take on this please. Silence is not an option.

If you looking for "Editor's stand on ..fill in your blank...", you are in for a big disappointment.

As we said before and (i believe it is timely for a reminder), Tomorrow was founded on open, transparent and diversity. Editors were *choosen* to add diversity. In other words, we seldom have unanimous stand. And if we do, it means we are not diverse enough. So when we comment/argue/troll on Tomorrow's comment or elsewhere, we are doing it on our own capacity and only our own.

Now back to your question on flamebaiting and trolling, who shall be the judge on who is a troll and who is not? Take one discussion thread as example, do we filter Agagoga or do we filter beowulf? Or take sieteocho vs sieteøcho: do we totally write off what sieteøcho said just because of an "o"?

"Constructive discussion" is something I love to read but I learn it a long time ago that "trolls" and "constructive" discussions are just two side of a same coin. As we got more interesting discussions like this thread, I expect we will get equivalently more trolls...that's the reality.

Ps: I bet you that there is at least one editors who is pissed off/disagree with me.

I have read the article on transparency and diversity. I don't know how transparent you can be in editing a blog aggregator. Diversity I understand. But that point I'll yield.

Regarding that discussion thread, I say filter neither. Both are giving constructive, though sometimes biased, comments. But look at sieteøcho. What does he do? He trolls for flamebaits. Not all posts are, but STILL the issue of trolling for flamebaits still stands.

And I beg to differ that trolling and constructive opinions are two sides of the same coin. I have no idea what coin you use that one side is larger in size than the other and yet, they are the same sides. Trolling has two sides.

The positive side of trolling is being a devil's advocate,

"challenging the dominant discourse and assumptions of forum discussions in an attempt to break the status quo of groupthink — the belief system that prevails in their absence." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_trolling

And the other motivation to trolling is "attention-seeking, amusement, wasting other people's time, or trying to start flame wars."

How on earth did you figure that trolling and constructive discussion are two sides of the same coin, given the above evidence, I have no idea, when trolling itself already has two sides to it.

Then, isn't it relatively easy to see who is trolling given the above definitions of trolling by the internet society?

bah!

Point taken eh? Lol :p

Even if we moderate trolls away.

Eventually, some constructive comments will become the trolls of the discussion thread. Because some people will take offense on almost anything

End of the day, there will be no comments left. Except those that say: "I aggree" or "I don't agree"

Ok, now let's look at a scenario. To be exact, let's take a look at that evolutionists vs creationists thread that jseng mentioned.

Characters: Mainly Agagooga, beowulf , yj, sieteocho and his alternative, sieteøcho*

So who's the troll? Going by the proposed definition of negative trolling, Agagooga and beowulf certainly doesn't fit the bill. They are arguing for their own stand, with constructive evidence to back them up. Neither is yj and sieteocho. So no moderation for them.

Take a look at our last player then: sieteøcho*

His comments thereafter:
try telling the feminists that women are to submit to men. i like to see you try. they will stab you a million times, and then set bible thumping carcass on fire.

in my religion, i see nothing wrong with that. my religion says that if i stab, burn or run over enough bible thumping idiots, i will go to heaven. also, if i do the same to anyone who disagrees with me, i will also go to heaven. it is said in my sacred leatherbound book. cost me $30. i wrote the rules myself too.

And more examples if you want, in other threads as well.

And how will constructive comments become trolls of the thread when there already is a definition as to what constitutes a thread?

End of the day, if Agagooga and beowulf still exists, there won't be a "I agree" or "I don't agree." There will be lots more than that.

We have to seperate chaff from the wheat, but I don't think deleting/censoring comments is the way.

As i said, ultimately, any comment can rile somebody's sensibility.

We could use a mod system like slashdot that assign points to comments. So that it can be filtered out. Nothing is deleted.

But i don't think this system can do it.

wah, such a hippocrite! accuse other people of being holier than tao but pretend to be so mighty himself. talk cock king ah?

go! go! comprang!
typical sinkaporean

In case you didn't get your facts correctly sie, I was saying that flamers are saying US of being holier than thou, when we try to give constructive opinions and not merely starting flame wars.

Please be more discerning in what you read and interpret. Obviously, you don't put much effort in interpreting.

if you think i don't put much thought in interpreting, you should see how much less i put in writing. but that is ok, because i am sieteocho. i am infallible. i can drop a stone in a well and it will still hit heaven.

Somehow, he reminds me of Maddox.

http://maddox.xmission.com/

close, but not close enough. here's a hint: i wrote the book beowulf kow tows to every night and every sunday morning.

Looking at her other pictures, showing the "pentagram" and dressing up Goth... not that I have anything against Goths, but it's just a wee bit contrived. She may or may not have wanted to die, but overall, I just have to say this:
Maybe she was looking for meaning in life (or non-life). Happy, well-adjusted people don't take on a subculture widely associated with morbidness.
Time to see if anyone will help her, because I think that's what she really needs. Unless there are any happy, well-adjusted Goths out there who can prove me wrong.