http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/viewPost5731.aspx

in little india, these indians swamp the entire hdb estates and carparks and roads.
they lie on the floors of carparks and void decks at 671 and 672 klang lane and belilios road. they buy food and eat at the void deck floors and spit out orange chewing gum and milk on the floors. but its totally lawless

xlx explanation on his blog about the impersonations seems to have valid points..
why not post it up so neutral readers can see the difference

What is wrong with Tomorrow.sg!

Diversity of Views = bullshit.
2 Editors approve an article, and stays posted, no matter what = bullshit.

What is the point, might as well need all 11 editors to approve before publishing.
You make the rules, you have to follow it.

Zero credibility left.

Exactly. If every other editor can yank down something that has already been approved by 2 other editors, then what's the point? It's a mockery of the process that the editors have set in place themselves.

Actually it wasn't a veto, but a withdrawal of a vote, so.

I notice an article has been removed from the front page of tomorrow.sg

http://www.livejournal.com/users/geekgeek/41449.html

what's up with this? Two editors aggreed to publish it. I thought thats all that is needed?

Why is it veto-ed?

someone doesn't want the world to know her evil doings
If tomorrow has any integrity at all, they should publish the expose.
If you guys can publish the dawn yang expose, tell me why you can't publish the xiaxue expose?

Because Dawn Yang is not en editor here? or because xiaxue is?

We will delete anything that is defamatory - simple as that. :)

That's hardly as "defamatory" as some of the stuff I see posted on some so-called famous female blogger from Singapore. Says a lot about an editor/writer when she chooses to defened herself by hiding behind a moderated forum/bulletin, rather than engage in active debate.

Grow up.

Debate with morons for what??

You've got a point there--doubt you're up to it anyway (like on the Channel U talkshow), so why waste everyone's time, no?

Things that are true are not defamatory.
coverups don't go well with smart people.
xiaxue you disgust me.

NKF and defamation

"It raised a question whether the republic’s defamation law is also – apart from preventing the innocent from any slanderous assault – protecting wrongdoings by the rich and powerful from being discovered... Because of the expenses, Singaporeans simply choose to turn a blind eye when they see something radically wrong, and society is the loser."

Even though you yourself are the author of it?

ps can't sleep? I know I wouldn't be able to, either.

Even if the article turns up on the Top 10 searches on Technorati?

This is a very damaging report if it is real. Perhaps more bloggers and readers should weigh in on this comment, especially from XX and those involved.

It seems this place is becoming a rather poor bulletin of Singapore bloggers as it doesn't cover many of the interesting issues like this in local blog scene. Editors care to comment?

Sorry to reply to my own comment, but the trackback I was responding to was deleted just before I post. I suppose that website in question is blacklisted on this website then.

For the rest wondering which website I was referring to, maybe you can do a blog search on Google for "Xiaxue" and "Expose".

i don't usually bother to explain my actions, but i'll save u guys some speculation this time.
i removed the trackback simply because it's not relevant to this post.

Yeah, that's like George W Bush saying that he invaded Iraq to kill the bad guys and bring democracy there. It's technically true, but nobody's going to believe him.

Trying to hide the truth is like somebody has diarrhoea, and he pretends he doesn't have to go to the toilet, but his ass is going to explode in seconds, and soon enough there will be shit all over the place.

you're terrible at analogies. anyway it didn't escape my notice that you have comments that link some 'irrelevant' sites, which i could have easily removed but i didnt, since i felt that it was a relevant continuation of a discussion thread (that perhaps has become irrelevant). also, a few brownie points for not hiding behind anonymity.

IMO the controversy is of interest only to a few bloggers and their audiences, and those people have already been reached by BM and xlx's blogs. i don't want other Tmr readers who don't care about this quarrel to have to go thru this shite since they have no context. by all means post it on your own blog - this stuff is already spreading with or without Tmr.

p.s. who knows, some other editor might disagree with me, and publish it. haha.

I hardly think a scandal involving Xiaxue is of interest only to a few bloggers and their audiences, when posts regarding lesser entities on lesser issues have been posted to great acclaim and have been very popular.

If it is spreading like wildfire, it means people are interested in it, no?

Thanks for your clarification. Some of us might otherwise have gotten away with thinking that it was either the inherent goodness of your heart or extreme blurness.

About the analogy, I was trying to choose between somebody desperately trying to hold his shit in, or some old woman trying to hold her labia in, but I think that one must be original.

May I raise the pt that to those ppl who don't care for this discussion, it makes the great difference between seeing 100 discussions they don't want to go through, and seeing 99 discussions they don't want to go through?

But I see this as a very positive development because at least instead of publicising some dirty linen like you did with Dawn Yang or Daphne Teo or Ephraim Loy you did the respectable thing and decided not to let it go through. I'm even going to pretend it has nothing to do with the fact that this time one of you is involved.

Even though you know I think that all impersonators should be drawn and quartered.

Actually we do have a policy of removing irrelevant trackbacks. The guy below you did bring up a valid point, though.

You delete irrelevant trackbacks, can of course. But why don't feature articles that allow these deleted trackbacks a place to be 'relevant'?

I believe that there are more than 1 people who tried to submit xialanxue's latest post as an article in tomorrow.sg.

I don't believe that ZERO of the editors don't find it an interesting sideshow of Singapore Blogosphere. Hell, it's more interesting than the 'Wedding Auntie' post.

Until proven otherwise, i am led to believe that articles critical of tomorrow.sg or any of its editors, will never be featured.

Well, we have a 2 to publish rule now, so even if 1 editor finds it an interesting sideshow, it won't be published. Ah well.

I believe we have published critical articles before, and those have been trackbacked to many times (and those trackbacks, being relevant, weren't censored).

Its funny but I want to point this out:

The post (see screenshot http://www.flickr.com/photos/geekgeek/85834840/)
was published by two of the editors , you and jseng. Now it's gone.

What do you have to say about this then?

because i revoke my vote and that no other editors choose to click publish?

To quote one editor: Storm meet teacup

Wah.. vote can be revoked?

Maybe its a new euphemism for self-censorship. Hard to believe that it will not be published if the site did not involve one of the editors.

We must be realistic. Nobody seriously expects the editors to publish that sort of stuff. If one editor were to stab another editor in the back like that then, pardon the pun, there would be no tomorrow.

This, of course, is the reason why we must do all the backstabbing ourselves.

Posts that are critical on an editor - Gets removed. Obviously.
Posts that are critical on ppl that the editor hates. - Gets tomorrowed?

If this is the case. Well done.

Actually, have we published posts critical of people one or more of the editors hates?

As of now? No. I don't think so.

But lately we've seen a published post getting yanked. A vote getting revoked. Stranger things has happened.

With such slack adherence to the rules that tomorrow.sg sets itself. I won't be surpirsed if it happened in the future.

How can a vote be revoked? It boggles the mind. It defeats the purpose of moderating and 2 editors making 2 votes. Right? If it can be revoked anytime to your whim for any reason.

Editors can and should revoke votes if they feel, on reflection, that the vote should not have been granted in the first place.

That said, a vote should not be granted lightly, to avoid this sort of problem.

well, that sure wasn't in the fine print when you guys proudly proclaimed the 'two votes publishing' system.

I apologise, we're having some technical difficulties right now (no, really).

Actually I don't see there's anything wrong with that.

If someone spray painted your car insulting your brother as a no-good son-of-a-b*tch motherf*cker, would you still drive around town in it?

But what is your brother is really a no-good son-of-a-b*tch motherf*cker?

And everyone have good reason to hate him?

Well if I were jseng I'd probably drive that car around because I am full of shit. If I were almost anybody else I'd want to protect that brother even if he were a no good son of a bitch motherfucker. And even if I were to tell people that he's a no good son of a bitch motherfucker, I would be very selective about who I want to tell.

That's why, to use a hypothetical situation, if I were a tomorrow editor, and if xiaxue were to go around with sillycelly and sandra power puff putting up a hate site to blinkymummy in xialanxue's name, I would seriously keep it to myself.

Regulars readers will know that this website Tomorrow.sg is run by the 13 editors and not only are they partners, they are friends as well. Hence I think it is understandable why they might have difficulty publishing the article in question in the first place.

Personally, if one of my friends did a wrong thing, I will help my friend to face up to the mistake than trying to cover it up, hoping that a valuable lesson is learnt as well. That I think is the role of friendship.

well honestly, some posts have led me to think that the editors have set a pretty low bar of how 'interesting' posts must be to warrant a spot on tommorrow.

So, I might think that this XLX/BM hoo-ha would interesting to at least 2/11 (XX excluded) editors.

Judging by the amount of submission and the comments on the submitted blog posts, I would think its pretty interesting to alot of people.

I wonder how many editors refrained from approving the submission because they truely believe that the entire issue is rubbish , or wanted to protect their fellow editor.

I vote for they truely believe that the entire issue is rubbish. I know that's what I think anyway. Perhaps it's because so much of the 'content' of the postings, comment spam, etc. is little more than the disjointed vitriol of personal vendettas?

and I want to add - Don't come up with the typical Sg defense:

"The fact that we allow you to post critical comments only proves that we allow voices of dissent"

It proves that we allow voices of dissent (deleted trackbacks notwithstanding), but it does not prove that we react well or appropriately to it.

Seems this place practices censorship of comments. I shouldn't be surprised really though I am quite disappointed.

I posted a link to a blog offering alternative viewpoints on this issue and it was deleted. Twice. And to think I posted the second time thinking to give this place the benefit of doubt.

Thanks for proving me wrong!

Censorship, brought to you by Xiaxue.

Uniquely Singapore censhorship.

I don't see why we should promote a site which propagates hate, and includes copyrighted photos of myself photoshopped with cum on my face.

Not only me... Of SPG, of Kenny Sia... and some others.

Do you?

Fuck freedom of speech - such websites should never have seen the light of day.

:) Please put yourself in my shoes - if you were me, would you allow the trackback of this website? Speak reason.

Well, the phrase "propagating hate" is pretty subjective. Is a blog devoted to arguing the viewpoints of another blogger more hateful than one that is filled with expletive-laden entries that insult everyone and everything, from educators to the disabled to (most) Bangladeshi workers?

Besides, a bulletin site with any kind of editorial integrity would allow criticism of itself to be appear, so long as it's well presented. We all know how big the BBC screwed up last year, but you didn't see them covering up their rear and taking it off their news programme, did you?

So this place features the best from Singapore's blogsphere.... Nice to see how matued Singapore's blogsphere is (cynical grin).

The last I checked, there was no such photos. Go see for yourself.
Now tell me why you can't link to that site? Your reasons have been nullified

I may be wrong, but is this the link that was taken down?

Probably not. Dun see any cum anywhere. Heh...

Oh, and if you're personally responsible for any of those hate sites, then why should you be ashamed to let people see your work? When after all we're just providing the link to Xiaxue's other website?