08-05-2011, 01:46 PM
Comprehension must really not be your strong point.
You registered/joined just to post on the GE?
This will be my last reply to you. You are free to make of it as you will.
The thread was initially conceived to swing marginal voters over with a scare of economy collapse. This fear is unfounded. Using fear-mongering tactics to rally others is below the belt.
I know of well-off retirees who voted for PAP for they wanted to live out their lives in peace. Does anyone deny them of that right? No. People can understand and respect their choice.
If you are extolling the virtues of the incumbent for own selfish bias and yet unable to provide substantiative well-thought out arguments to support your claims, you will continue to receive the kind of flak from your friends/peers whom you derogate as immature, emotional types. Might there than be some basis of truth in their reply to you? Or you would then prefer to come online to deride them instead?
I read the intent behind other's action very clearly. One should be able to clearly state their vested interest. They should not seek to spread rumours which are unsubstantiated. That is damaging. This is the same for analyst reports. Why do you think that they will issue a disclaimer of vested interest for coverage?
Selective quoting does not gain you points. We have more discerning readers than that. I have apologise to hyom for the tone of the rebuke while he has seen the fallacy of his original stand. Now why can't you?
Learn to understand and intepret why those around you respond in the manner they do. Take out the extremes at both end.
You registered/joined just to post on the GE?
This will be my last reply to you. You are free to make of it as you will.
The thread was initially conceived to swing marginal voters over with a scare of economy collapse. This fear is unfounded. Using fear-mongering tactics to rally others is below the belt.
I know of well-off retirees who voted for PAP for they wanted to live out their lives in peace. Does anyone deny them of that right? No. People can understand and respect their choice.
If you are extolling the virtues of the incumbent for own selfish bias and yet unable to provide substantiative well-thought out arguments to support your claims, you will continue to receive the kind of flak from your friends/peers whom you derogate as immature, emotional types. Might there than be some basis of truth in their reply to you? Or you would then prefer to come online to deride them instead?
I read the intent behind other's action very clearly. One should be able to clearly state their vested interest. They should not seek to spread rumours which are unsubstantiated. That is damaging. This is the same for analyst reports. Why do you think that they will issue a disclaimer of vested interest for coverage?
Selective quoting does not gain you points. We have more discerning readers than that. I have apologise to hyom for the tone of the rebuke while he has seen the fallacy of his original stand. Now why can't you?
Learn to understand and intepret why those around you respond in the manner they do. Take out the extremes at both end.