Page 5 of 5
Posted: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:59 am
by sundaymorningstaple
Like any board, we do get the occasional one and normally the regulars sort them out. If they persist, we take care of the problem but unless they are out and out trolls or recalcitrant hardnoses we try to assimilate them but if they cannot abide, we will ban them. We are getting a lot at the moment from the old Angry Board which apparently has shut down or is otherwise broken. Some are coming from there and their old habits die hard. We operate differently than most boards as the moderators are given a great degree of flexibility. We are also regular board member and were before we became moderators. You will notice we generally sign off as moderator in different color text when we put on our moderator caps. Otherwise, we are regular posters free to post our feelings as well. And we call each other to task as well because of the simple fact that we are all human. 
moderator
Posted: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:11 am
by yogaloungeforever
Ok noted MS! labelling them scums was way off i admit. whilst no excuses i could not figure why the angry response fr OP which was not necessary. hence the labelling!
So will use sarcasm in the near future and no more racist attacks
Mad Scientist wrote:..... . But methinks, racially abusing someone because of colour should be put a stop
Yet again, what do I know , cos I am MAD
Posted: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:19 am
by sundaymorningstaple
Thanks, yoga. I and everybody else will appreciate it.
Posted: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 1:36 pm
by nutnut
+1
Posted: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 9:03 pm
by zzm9980
Posted: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 9:31 pm
by blue_thunder
izzit over oredi
Posted: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 4:01 pm
by PrimroseHill
I can come out and play now?
Posted: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 4:51 pm
by sundaymorningstaple
Tis over. Sometimes people let bulldog mouths overload hummingbird arses.
occasionally.
Posted: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 7:07 pm
by BoroBoy
I can understand the existing PR's being annoyed with people milking the system but after only 6 months in a country who really who is going to care that much about the country and want to be loyal to it? its not really human nature.
If Singapore want to stop PR abuse I cant understand why they just dont put a 7 year time limit on before applying like they do in HK. That will weed most people out who just want to abuse the system and will give others a specific goal to aim for rather than it be up in the air.
7 years is also enough time to encourage commitment and loyalty to the country.
Posted: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 7:21 pm
by AngMoG
BoroBoy wrote:I can understand the existing PR's being annoyed with people milking the system but after only 6 months in a country who really who is going to care that much about the country and want to be loyal to it? its not really human nature.
If Singapore want to stop PR abuse I cant understand why they just dont put a 7 year time limit on before applying like they do in HK. That will weed most people out who just want to abuse the system and will give others a specific goal to aim for rather than it be up in the air.
7 years is also enough time to encourage commitment and loyalty to the country.
Yes indeed - clear, transparent rules would help a lot, as would a minimum years of residency requirement. Fully agree that it should be done, it would make things a lot easier.
Posted: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 9:02 pm
by x9200
Is Singapore competitive enough (broad set of factors) to have people queuing for 7 years to get the PR status? I doubt it. They are probably much better off with the current, semi transparent system even if it is frequently abused.
Posted: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 9:19 pm
by sundaymorningstaple
By the system being semi-transparent, it allow the gahment to tweak the system depending on circumstances at any given time and economic condition or outlook. Probably better this way as it gives them the flexibility they need, considering their small size.
