Gomez doesn’t have to but if he want us to understand which perspective he coming from, and help us see and understand from his point of view then it is his interest to educate us as much. Not that we are stupid but if we have to be objective. It is important to convince us as much as how his thesis stand. Same for government.

“If you want to do that take it up with Monash directly, every thesis is open to public review. You mean, you didn’t know that?”
Well, if Gomez could help to obtain the permission to view publicly or tell us the link to dowload the thesis, we will be glad.
Not all thesis can be obtained easily from university just by asking. Thesis can be requested to keep confidential and hence may not be subjected for public access. eg due to sensitive information of company, state, eg…

Well I know exactly what to make of your silly statement. What you may have just demonstrated to all here is how little you actually know about what a PhD thesis actually is. It’s a supposition of fact i.e a hypothesis, not to a statement of fact dumb dumb, so how is it supposed to prove or disprove anything? What the hell are you talking about?

Besides why should he post his thesis to establish a point for the benefit of anyone here or anywhere else? Tell me do you splay out the pictures of your girlfriend in the net for all to see? That’s really a private matter between him and his assessors at Monash.

The way I see it the man ran a fair and square race and to shoot him down just because you didn’t bother to read broadly on what a PhD should or should not be simply says you are not a sportsman or even understand that word beyond its dictionary meaning.

I don’t want any part in this. We fight fair and square. We don’t tie our opponents up and expect them to go ten rounds. We don’t post or views and sand bag others who try to respond to them. This we do not do! That is simply not us.

As I said, from what I see the man ran a fair and square race and I don’t think anyone has any basis to question either his integrity or shed aspersions on the merit of his PhD thesis.

If you want to do that take it up with Monash directly, every thesis is open to public review. You mean, you didn’t know that?

Good evening

SD

Imagine if you are locked in a cave for so many years only hearing / staring whatever there was in the cave. One fine day, you come out of the cave, do you sincerely think that is not going to change a bit of how you perceive the outside world and especially on the person who locked you in the cave in the first place, not literally of course.

The pinkish clown once says “increase GST to help the poor ?” So what condition ? So we know that the condition is to rob Peter first than to pay Peter.

It just be the same with Gomez’s thesis. What conditions govern the theory in Gomez’s thesis ?

Until Gomez’s thesis is opened for all to read, it is hard to validate or invalidate his thesis. Thesis after all is just thesis that comes from analysis and observation, not the rule of nature or universe.

I don’t believe the internet does not have any impact on politics. It has in virtually every single country, without a single exception, so why should sg be any different?

I personally think only the brotherhood ppl can answer this question or perhaps another group who may have proven proficiency in numbers and put many of our thoughts and suspicion to rest.

The problem is they will also take Gomez to the cleaners. That may not be such a good thing. In that sense, I have to commend the brotherhood for staying well clear from commenting about J.Gomez’s thesis.

They are wise. As their leader once said, we take no sides politically. We are neutral. We are pick and choose our battles so that no one can make use of us politically or otherwise. We have to do this and if possible we try not to interfere when we see political parties trying to kill each other, its none of our business.

Having said that, Mr Gomez’s finding is not a surprising conclusion. Ultimately despite the above, voters vote according to the impact on their lives to which the Internet is merely a medium.

There is a difference between being told that things are bad vis a vis actually feeling it. Malaysia is one example where crime, corruption and racial politics have had a decisive impact on people’s lives and accordingly on people’s votes.

However, it is not to say the Internet does not have an impact.

A single issue like siting a FW dormitory will have more impact on votes than a thousand blogs online. However, a thousand blogs online talking about it emphasize the issues. It amplifies the voice and concerns which in turn affect voter preference.

I am not going to say, I agree or disagree with its findings. To be honest with you. I dont know how to judge it. Its true, it comes from a very respectable university, but I dont think that is a stamp of approval. Or is it? I dont know.

At such times, I do hope someone really smart and intelligent, like maybe eli diodati, the brotherhood people or even Dr Cherian George can lend their professional expertise to shed more light into what is said and to even offer a critique by dissecting its various parts. That I feel would make a more balance view, as it is, it’s hard to tell the trees from the forest.

Very hard.

Just my two cents

Just an itch i have for a long time.
Maybe TOC can interview people on the streets with their faces mosaic’d , if they choose, to express their love for this kind of system or how they appreciate this kind of system , on youtube.
The reason for asking this is, I forgot was there news / tv report about this thing. Maybe TOC video or Mr Seelan can take the lead in this aspect.

I am sure many would appreciate this effort.

regards
Ho PinkPink
“we will never loose with the ….”

Dr Gomez’s paper highlights that internet is a niche source of political information that is predominantly confined to the young and educated. It suffers from low readership and is not able to rival the local mainstream media’s domination position in the delivery of content. Hence, it is clear the next step forward would be deregulation of mass media. Currently, the Film Act has been loosened up to allowing making and showing of political films. What’s next thus must be deregulation of the print media newspaper.

Where is the logic?

Even if one believe in the conclusion of the flawed research that the electoral system should be changed because the internet is useless, how does it follow that newspapers should be deregulated?

(You can advocate deregulation of newspapers, but this does not follow from the argument in the above article)

“No person shall print or publish or assist in the printing or publishing of any newspaper in Singapore unless the chief editor or the proprietor of the newspaper has previously obtained a permit granted by the Minister authorising the publication thereof, which permit the Minister may in his discretion grant, refuse or revoke, or grant subject to conditions to be endorsed thereon.”
—Newspaper and Printing Presses Act of 1974, Cap. 206, Sec. 21.

via the onlinecitizen.

The current electoral system in Singapore is impervious to the impact of the internet.

James Gomez

Aim of study

The main goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of alternative online political content on Singapo…

1. Finding correlation with three data points (i.e. election results) is bullshit. It’s like trying to determine if a coin has a higher tendency of showing up heads or tails by flipping it only three times.

2. The fact that PAP gerrymanders is obvious. Don’t have to deliver a simple message with a flawed research report.

3. I doubt the plead to reform the electoral system is going to work. It’s probably better off to think about new win-win strategies.

The percentage of voters who voted one way or the other is the one that SHOULD correlate to election results. We all know how that worked out….