I don't limit myself to certain thing or category. When talk about something serious, we need to have complete data. If no data, then need to do simulation. Besides from the grass root level of feeling, we need to put in the politic factor. We have multiple races and religion too. You can tell people to listen to you. But end of the day, it is all depend on if they accept.
LOL Abstract to the point of being hilarious.
What 'simulation' do you suggest we do ? Exactly what are you simulating and on what platform do you run the 'simulation' ? A computer ? Are you simulating if 'X' number of people feel this way, then the result will be 'Y' incident happening.
You do understand what I mean when I label you 'Abstract', don't you ?
Ok, I'll play along with your little gem of an idea.
First of all I have no idea ofwhat you mean by going out and collect the 'data'. For that matter, I doubt you yourself have the faintest idea about the practicality of how you are actually suppose to collect this so called 'data'......which as it happens, you have conveniently left undefined without any specifics. How is the data is to be collected ? What criteria will you use to vet the opinions ? From which particular demograhic of the population will you collect this data ? Will you rank various opinion based purely on subjectivity or would a person's background, education, political leanings, etc have a bearing ? Will a person of a particularly sensitive nature and who is easily given to bigotry and emotional outbursts be proferred an equal ranking to one who is well-learned and moderate ? Naturally, those who shout the loudest tends to drown out all other opinions. So will your 'data' reflect this accurately ??
Suppose you collect the 'data' to gauge the nation's feelings and it happens that 'data' tells you some people are pissed off, some are not, some are undecided. So based on this 'data', where will you draw your 'imaginary line' that tells you when it is OK, or not OK, to take affirmative action ?
See what I'm saying ? You are just being abstract and obtuse. Your statement of using the real world as your laboratory of study and data collection sounds very smart but short of actually having any substantive value.
Most of all, it has no 'timely' value.
By timeliness it means that basically, while Motolov cocktails are being flung around, religious symbols are being desecrated, protests ongoing, and unity is being strained, you will adopt a non-committal response until you have your 'data'....My God, brother, if we depend on you in an emergency, dah mampoi lah kita semua.
And if your 'data' happens to tell you 'Biarkan saje lah', what then ? No need to do anything lah.
You can tell people to listen to you. But end of the day, it is all depend on if they accept.
All we are telling people to do is to use their God-damn common sense. We are merely telling them that the mere use of a word should not be cause for rioting and hooliganism. Because it is patently ridiculous and immature that people can be so fragile emotionally that they work themselves into a frenzy over the mere mention of just one word. And in all proper context, the word was quoted in the Herald to refer to the deity in a respectful manner. The Herald did not insult Him, or denigrate Him. They merely refer to Him in his proper name....and that is respect. But still people rioted ? For fuck knows what were they angry, I have no idea.
We have multiple races and religion too.
That is true but does that mean you have to go out of your way to placate every emotionally fragile idiot who has a hair-trigger disposition to firebomb you just on account of race and religion ?
That is zealotry and bigotry, my friend. And it's NOT something you should consider placating, because there is no middle ground where such extremism can exist where everyone is happy. For sure we have different races and religions and we must appreciate each other for the diversity. But.....BUT....if you think it's allright to ask the opinion of a zealot and pander to his whims because he happened to be part of our nation's diversity ?
You and data .......lol
If you want real world data, all you need to do is look back a couple of years when Dr.M was in charge. The Old Man may not have been right all the time. He's got a ton of flaws and imperfection but he kept a firm hand in the running of this country. And what was the result ? People voted BN in with a landslide victory. And why would anyone do that if people had not been confident with his firm hand in running the nation.
When the Old Man retired, you get a bunch of politicians succedding him who were not committal on issues......probably waiting for your fabled 'data' before deciding howto jump. What was the result ? BN lost a lot of support in the last elections.
So you wait lah...for your precious data to tell you how to act ...for sure you inspire confidence.
) and accept call and listen to the grass root's feeling. This is the easiest way to make people to accept and people will stuck in front of the TV in stead of go out and listen to some provoking talk. Make a series for 3-4 months, let the heat go down 1st and then announce the final decision of the parliament that with the Highness supporting. Case close once and for all, regardless like it or not. There are a lot of tricks involved but I just don't wanna say too much.
