If so then, this generally wont be good after all. Internet is all for everyone, ANYONE, ANYBODY [as opposed to 'somebody'- a somebody who is a who-is-who type] who wish to write , let him or she do so. I venture to say that where on earth [in Singapore] do we have an outlet to air whatever views that is dear or not dear in one’s heart.

Do not come up with guidelines this guidelines that which I believe, in the name of progress and refinement will morph into ‘rules and regulations’ for strict adherence over time.

Whether anonymity or not is not paramount important.

At the end of the day, its ENTIRELY up to the reader to interpret, to agree or not agree, or just absorb neutrally without ascribing a value of to believe or not – that is mere casual reading of any posts.

My humble opinion is, 2-fold – let us promote free-flow of information, which at times should be taken with a pinch of salt if the reader so choose to if certain subjects are somehwhat touchy or so, and 2ndly be mindful of ‘do not do unto others what we do not want others to do unto us ‘.

Well spotted. Thank you for highlighting this. I think, those ppl in the intelligent singaporean who asked those questions have done a decent job. On record, they asked and this matter has been thrown out to the square. On record, it was not even answered.

It’s clear to me.

You must think we are all children. How do you expect us to believe a non democratically elected committee will be able to bring about real and meaningful change for the better?

Want to bring about better change. Then make it democratic. Didnt even try. Didnt even bother. This is no better than a power grab. Reminds me of the mentally of a certain family run party that keeps putting words into the populace mouth under the pretense. This is the medicine you need.

You are spot on. The problem lies with the fact that the field is not level and why should one be constrained by subtle rules / regulations not to your advantage with little room to move.

Unless the action / speech is criminal (not those disagreeing political opinions made to sway support for alternative views) in the strictest sense, no should be penalised by arbitrary rules / regulations.

It is never a good idea to marginalize or dismiss a community in the net, even if that can be done, who will be around after the second act? What if they say. I refuse to play? Then what happens?

Yes, most importantly, there must be real freedom of information and remove all ISA that arrest political dissident and Police force not under the order of the despondent dictator. Until the government can do that, let’s not even ask the people of their real identity. The government knows suppressing critical information will be the key to their regime and therefore withhold information under various acts. This usually result in speculation under anonymous identity.

Remember the guerilla warfare against larger and establish force in history. Hit and run and caught the coffers unaware. Keeping anonymous has this effect.

Oh yeah, I forget there is recent law to protect the coffers from private investigation too. What a well-organized musical choir !

Look around you. The exodus has already begun. Look very carefully. The same people who once asked why have not stopped asking completely. Why? Perhaps they know it is useless to talk to a steam roller. They no longer even want to discuss the matter.

This is what happens when all you do is nurture the cult of hear no evil, see no evil and think no evil. This is not heaven, it is hell.

The people who produce deserve to be respected. They deserve a voice. Not ppl like you. You just post and yet even you have a voice, but what abt them?

In the long run the formation of the IC3 will be beneficial for all netizens. I dont believe there is even a single anonymous blogger out there to date who has even presented so much as one single counter argument why.

(1) The community moderation through a committee is such a bad idea.

(2) Or, even presented any arguments concerning the cons.

All I see is positives here. So I am sure even anonymous bloggers should recognize since they will be the beneficiaries; why should they even complain abt minor points like non consultation. I mean if some stranger is going to bequeth $1 million to you will you say no.

I happen to be a regular reader in the internet. So I dont think anything has really escaped me. Like I said, you will not find a single counter argument why this whole idea is such a bad idea.

And I too agree we should all put our differences aside and stand behind these bloggers who have had the courage to step out so bravely and defend all our rights.

TLA

I am very happy the internet has finally decided to nominate a group of representatives to represent our interest finally. As for the anonymous bloggers. If they do not bother to turn up, that says volumes about their level of commitment. Besides we all of them without a single exception regularly produce rubbish which no one bothers to read. It will be no loss to Singapore. That is also one reason why I only read The Online Citizen. Here I know all the writers have declared their real identity. I don’t need to speculate on whether they have a hidden agenda. This is definitely a move in the right direction as we all need to work together to find a way to combat porn, hate speech and lies in the internet.

We need to all stay united on this. Our government has worked very hard to bring us a great life, but they cannot do it alone. They need us all to help them and this we can all do by supporting this IC3 move, it is definitely the way to go as Mr Tan has mentioned.

Have a nice day

I have seen the harm that can be done through the irresponsible use of the blogs and forums. There are people making slanderous remarks and inciting hatred under the “cloak of anonymity”. Some of these efforts are also organised by business entities to attack their competitors or consumer advocates. It is difficult for the moderators to do their work effectively.

I have a suggestion. There should be a place in the Internet for a responsible person to register his identity (i.e. name, email, occupation, pseudonym). This person can give views in forums and blogs to be signed off under his real name or pseudonym.

At present, I always sign off my views with my real name and verified by by email address. One day, someone can mis-use my name to express views their own views. We need to find a way to prevent this.

Perhaps, this “identity” effort can be managed by the proposed citizen-based Internet Content Consultative Committee (IC3). Or, it can be managed by the organisation who now handles SingPass (a system to register people’s identity for Government transactions, similar to the use of NRIC).

I hope that the day will soon come, that some forums and blogs make it mandatory for posters to use a registered, verifiable identity (even under a psedonym).

Here is my summary:
1. Allow responsible discussion in the Internet
2. Allow people to register their identity and post their views under this “identity”