Comments_Term 3

1) Calvin Mau - Messages offer mother, daughter hope amid carnage

http://calcal1997.blogspot.com/2011/07/messages-offer-mother-daughter-hope.html

2) Chuang Fu Yuan - Shylock: Villain/Victim? T3P2

http://2i305lablog.blogspot.com/2011/07/shylock-villainvictim.html

3) Gaw Ban Siang - Justice - Retributive or Rehabilitative?

http://bansiang2i3.blogspot.com/2011/08/justice-retributive-or-rehabilitative.html

4) Koh Yi Da - Name Calling

http://2i3numbereight.blogspot.com/2011/08/name-calling.html

5) Lee Liak Ghee - Should leaders be judged by their private lives?

http://leeliakghee2i310.blogspot.com/2011/08/should-leaders-be-judged-by-their.html

6) Lee Wei Ren - Home Room system - Pros and Cons

http://lolz-teddy.blogspot.com/2011/08/home-room-system-pros-and-cons.html

7) Lu Wen Hao - Symbolism of the Three Caskets

http://lwh2i3sec2la.blogspot.com/2011/07/symbolism-of-three-caskets.html

8) Jonathan Ng - eBooks vs Traditional Books

http://ispark18.blogspot.com/2011/07/ebooks-vs-traditional-books.html

9) Kervin Tay - Shakespeare's Language & Our Language

http://kervin1i3.blogspot.com/2011/07/shakespeares-language-our-language.html

10) Justin Tay - What makes a gentleman?

http://justinlablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/what-makes-gentleman.html

Plagiarism #10

Plagiarism, to me, is a very serious and should not be condoned at all.

Plagiarism is basically the act of using another person's work and passing it of as yours. An example of a very famous book which had been accused of being plagiarized was the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. In this case, Adrian Jacobs claimed that the plot for the Goblet of the Fire was taken from his book, "Willy the Wizard". Of course, Jacob failed to win the case and was later faced with a legal cost of a few million dollars. To me, I believe there are two types of plagiarism.

Type 1: The smart one

This type of plagiarism would be where the plagiarizer would copy extracts from the source before tweaking the words by paraphrasing to make it seem as though it was written by himself. He later does not cite the sources totally. This type of people are those that think that they are smart, but actually fails terribly at it. Even though words are changed, Google can easily sought out the best possible results and most of the time, the first result that come out is the plagiarized source.

Type 2: The blind one

This type of plagiarism is where one would copy and paste entirely from the source and just cite it as a reference at the back. Well, I believe this type of people are those that has totally no knowledge of plagiarism, as I admit to have done the same thing when I was in primary school. Of course, I must say that this is the most innocent type of plagiarism, where to plagiarizer does not know what he is doing most of the time.

Overall, I feel that schools should educate their students properly and allow them to understand the true meaning of plagiarism. In addition, teachers should do as much as they can to ensure that the students who plagiarize would not repeat their fatal mistakes again.

National Pride or Despicable Action? #9

In the recent World Cup Qualifier match between Singapore and Malaysia, it was caught on video footage that a Malaysian had shone a green laser on the Singapore keeper during the match. This action by the Malaysian fan was definitely an inappropriate and wrong one, but can we say that his actions were entirely wrong?

What he is doing here also shows his national pride for his country, Malaysia. In doing this, he worries not that he would be chased out of the stadium, or even face undesirable consequences in his country, but all he was doing was to give Malaysia a chance to win and enter the next round of the World Cup qualifying match. We can see how much he wants Malaysia to win, his urge for Malaysia to gain the wonderful opportunity to enter the World Cup and bring pride to its nation. Of course, I am not approving about his actions, but thinking about it this way, it does show a sense of unity and love Malaysians have for their country, no?

However, from the viewpoint of a typical Singaporean, their actions were definitely uncalled for and absolutely unnecessary. This action, not only brings about an unfair advantage, but would also give Singapore a negative impression on Malaysians. In the society we're in today, people tend to over generalize and stereotype very often. By shining laser on the Singapore's keeper, this despicable action would make most Singaporeans stereotype that Malaysians are cunning and would do anything to win. When matter comes to worse, they might even say that MALAYS are the sly one, which would affect the racial harmony we have in Singapore today.

Overall, I feel that this act by the Malaysian fan is more of a despicable action then an act of national pride. As this case had happened before in Malaysia's match against Indonesia, it was definitely not an accident. In comparison to resorting to this underhand means to win, the Malaysian fans should just allow the Malaysian players to prove their ability in a fair match of football to see who is truly better, who can make it pass the qualifying rounds. I'm sure that even if the Singapore keeper became affected and blinded by this laser to the extend where Malaysia managed to score a goal and win, none of the Malaysian fans would be happy. Thus, I believe football matches should be played by the players and only the players itself, as the fans present in the stadium are only there to provide moral and not physical support.

Was Portia being merciful or driving Shylock to ends? #8

Whether or not Portia was being merciful or was trying to drive Shylock to his wits ends on purpose depends on how you view Portia as a person. If you view her as one who is pretty, rich, generous, kind (the perfect girl in the context), she was definitely being merciful towards Shylock when she was asking him to show mercy towards Antonio. I believe Portia was already prepared beforehand and have already decided to use these reasons to backfire Shylock's bond, and what she was doing was giving him a chance to stop what he's doing for the benefit of both himself and Antonio. Similarly, previously in the novel, we can see Portia trying to help Bassanio when he knew that Antonio was in trouble. Instead of being stingy and unwilling to let him leave, she asked him to give many more times the amount that was borrowed just to save his dear friend. This shows clearly that Portia was a very generous and big-hearted person in nature.

However, it isn't entirely impossible that Portia was doing this to drive Shylock to his ends. In this case, a very possible reason was to stop Shylock from threatening both Bassanio and his dear friend, Antonio. Through her actions, she first tricked Shylock into saying that he would only have the penalty, but later turned the tables around by saying that the penalty cannot be carried out as it's suspected of murder. Similarly, in other parts of the novel, we can see that she wasn't as "kind" as she appears to be, having a different thinking as compared to what she says. Therefore, being a smart and cautious person herself, it was possible for her to do this on purpose.

Ultimately, I believe that she was being merciful towards Shylock, as it is more reasonable to say that she is a generous person than a ruthless person. Given her actions towards Antonio and Bassanio, I'm positive that she wouldn't treat Shylock, another typical human being, any worse.

Euthanasia #7

Euthanasia is basically the act of intentionally ending a life to relieve the pain and suffering he/she is experiencing. In different countries, there are different laws pertaining to this issue, but deep within oneself, is Euthanasia truly correct and should be an act that must be supported?

To view the issue from one who believes that Euthanasia isn't wrong, it should be supported with the basis that Euthanasia is entirely voluntarily. When one decides to undergo Euthanasia, he/she would have to settle paper works as well as the grief to leave their family members. That feeling, which may not be known to others, is a very painful one. One would have to expect his death the next morning, and knowing that it would be his last night living in the world would definitely be a tormenting one. Furthermore, when one makes a choice, it is his choice. One definitely has the right to do whatever he wants with his life, no matter good or bad. In addition, as Euthanasia will only be permitted if the patient is in a severe condition, I see no wrong in helping him end his life peacefully.

However, to view this issue from a moral point of view, Euthanasia would definitely be wrong. Although the patients may agree to the act, no human deserves a right to die more than another. What's more, since everyone is a human being, no one should have the right to take away someone's life without facing the consequences. Imagine, if someone on the street tells you to kill them, are you morally right to "assist" them in killing? Besides, decisions can be changed anytime. When one asks for Euthanasia, he/she may not be in the right state of mind, and it'll be too late should he/she finds the true value of life later on.

Overall, I don't think that this issue is really subjective to different people. As for me, I believe that Euthanasia should not be done as regardless of how much one is pleading for you to end his life, we should never agree to it, as it'll definitely haunt us for the rest of our lives for taking a life.

Why isn't there a Senior or Elderly Day #6

There's no exact reason that is said, but I do have a few ideas for this:

1) Youth Day is one for the youths to reflect.

People often want children to cherish their childhood while they are still at it, and I believe Youth Day is a day specially set for them to reflect. (Although not many actually does that) Adults often reason that when one grows old, they no longer have the ability nor the strength or are having large difficulties trying to learn new things as compared to when they were young. Very often, children refuse to listen and end up saying these to their future children and the cycles repeats again. In contrary wise, they won't have an "Elderly Day" for the elderly to reflect. To the elderly, many of them already feels sad / regretful that they wasted their childhood on pointless activities, and having this Elderly Day might backfire and hurt these elderly instead.

2) Grandparents Day

There is already an official day proclaimed "Grandparents Day", thus there isn't really a need for Elderly Day. For Grandparents Day, children usually return to their parents home to have dinner, chat, and so on. In the busy world we're in today, many children are unable to visit their parents often, leaving them lonely. Thus, having this day allows for these children to return to their parents side and learn to take good care of their parents. This day is especially important to me, as I felt that children nowadays especially should learn to appreciate their parents. Some of these children, due to work, place their parents in the Old Folks Home. Others who are extremely poor tries to get money and inheritance from these parents through CPF, the ungrateful ones.

Overall, I believe the main reason for there to be no Elderly Day is because no one wants to be reminded that they are old. Everyone who experienced aging would always want to return to their days in childhood, regardless of how impossible it is.

Quoted: "How sweet and fitting it is to die for one's country". A Lie? #5

"How sweet and fitting it is to die for one's country", I believe this statement has different viewpoints to it under different circumstances and scenarios.

If someone was to die for a country when it is during a war to defend one's country, I believe it is definitely a very noble and honorable act. In wars, there would definitely be inevitable deaths, hundreds of thousands of them. However, what are this soldiers really fighting for? Why are they sacrificing their lives? Well, it's for the rest of the people in the country; they fight for the land, they fight for peace, they fight to defend. In wars, the country defending is always at loss; they have to protect its people as well. These citizens are their "assets", and losing them would be entirely losing the whole place, and thus, soldiers are tasked to protect the people at all cost, even by dying. Thus, I believe these people who sacrificed for the country is those that's truly noble and of course, should feel honored to do so.

However, although both are soldiers, I feel that one who died trying to attack another country should not feel sweet at all. Not saying that these soldiers are the "evil" ones, since the leaders are the ones who launched the attacks, but it is definitely not something to be proud of to me. When attacking others to gain their land, I believe it's a cruel and inhuman act, especially directed at the leaders. All they want is more land, more power, more money, and in doing so, they kill thousands of people, and they don't even show any signs of regret nor grief for them. Thus, I believe those who tries to gain power, whether under orders or not, won't feel sweet and fitting when dying.

All in all, I believe that no one should be killing another human. This inhuman act, even if for the country, should be avoided at all cost as none of us would feel happy for killing another human being.

Peer Pressure #4

On the previous assembly, we were introduced to this topic of peer pressure. During the talk, we were exposed to two different scenarios, one being the "bad boys" side and the other being the "cool girls" side. These videos are basically the extremest bad side of human nature in school, and shows how to new "recruits" to these "gangs" managed to break away from this bad company with the help of their true friends. We were also introduced to a new term, N.A.H

N - Identify NEGATIVE influence

With reference to the video, the negative influence for the male group is basically those friends who are always asking the male lead out for LAN gaming and encouraging him to skip school and steal money from his parents. The negative influence for the female group, on the other hand, are the group who persuades the female lead not to be friends with her best friend because they "didn't like her".

A - AVOID them

This was just what the characters in both groups did, they broke away from them. Besides, most of those negative influence didn't exactly treat them like friends anyway.

H - Finding HEALTHY influence

This is for the person to identify which friends are those that will stand by him/her, encourage him/her to be a better person in life instead of ruining him/her.

Together, these three factors form up the most important and crucial of maintaining a healthy peer group, that will stand by you and push you into becoming a better person no matter what. Even though this cases of extreme peer pressure may not be available in our school (asking them to do foolish things like skipping school), there are definitely are cases like asking them out for LAN gaming and affecting their results indirectly. By finding a healthy peer group early and not be influenced by the negative, we will definitely progress to becoming a better and successful person in life.

A True Gentleman #3

According to Dictionary.com, a gentleman is a man regarded of having qualities of refinement associated with a good family. However, I do feel that this definition is wrong.

As mentioned in a class, a gentleman would have a few distinct qualities: being smart in appearance, knows what to speak and when to speak, is polite to all and have appropriate behaviour at all times as well as the ability to keep cool under any situation. With reference to the meaning given in Dictionary.com, not all gentleman have to have a “good family” as said. Are you saying that one with a bad background, e.g. family members in jail, does not possess the quality to be a gentleman? And if that’s the case, does that mean everyone who did not have a pleasant family history cannot be a gentleman?

In contrary wise, I do not think that being smart in appearance is an important aspect of being a gentleman. As the saying goes: don’t judge a book by its cover. However smart a man might look on the outside, he could be an all jerk in it, breaking hearts of girls. However, a man might be all filthy or so, but he could have a big heart and possesses every other quality. So in this case, does this mean that a person who doesn’t look smart, especially if it’s natural, cannot be called upon as a true gentleman?

All in all, I feel that a gentleman cannot be judged based on what you see him as and what he’s background is, but must be felt and interacted with to determine whether he is a true gentleman.

What do you think: was the state’s image “rehabilitated”? #2

After such an incident made known to public, there would definitely be a change of perception on the state of Mississippi. To me, I feel that the state's image had not been rehabilitated, even after the actions laid down by the justice system.

First of all, the victims in this case were three civil right workers, a White, a Jew, and a Black, killed by the Klu Klux Klan. According to initial reports, these three were actually caught, but released later on. Worst of all, they went missing after their release and were found dead shortly after. What did these people do to deserve such misfortune? All they were trying to do was out of goodwill, trying to help the Blacks and regain their state in the society, and because of that, they were killed?

Even though the eighteen culprits were caught and imprisoned later, I feel that just a mere imprisonment is totally insufficient. Three lives and all they got was a four to ten years of sentence to jail? That's totally absurd! Today, murder in United States would incur at least 15 years of jail term, which I still feel is not a very reasonable exchange for a life. Although the officials in Mississippi changed their perspective of prejudice in the state, which I felt made the three noble sacrifices a worthwhile one.

Till today, Mississippi is still remembered for the Civil Rights Movements. If we were to ask people their impression of Mississippi, I'm sure the majority would provide a negative one.

Civil Rights #1

When it comes to serious crimes, is it right for the justice system to pursue criminal charges several decades after the crime is said to have occurred?

I believe the justice system has every right to pursue these criminal charges after several decades after the crime is said to have occurred, even for crimes which aren't that severe.

My stand for this would be that when one commits a crime, regardless big or small, he or she should definitely face the rightful punishment for it. Should a criminal be let off that easily if the police are unable to arrest him or her in the stipulated amount of time, more and more people would bound to try commit crimes, be it out of desperation or for the fun of it. This would then lead to an overall increase in crimes rate, making the country less safe for its citizens. Moreover, according to a research on the percentage of criminals caught after committing different crimes in 2004, http://askville.amazon.com/criminals-caught-crimes-commit/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=7191078 , majority of the criminals who actually commit serious crimes like murder are actually caught. So does that means that those who are lucky in their time to escape the clutches of justice can be let go that easily if caught again in the future?

Some might say that these criminals may have repented in the time where they weren't caught after committing their crime.But that is definitely an unfair statement, as of course, it does not apply to all the criminals. Most of all, are these criminals so special to be different from others, to be able to repent in a surrounding much better than those who were caught; jail? Even so, I do feel that some cases should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, as some of these criminals might have committed their crimes out of accident when they were hot in their head, or when it is obvious that the person have repented through his kind acts in the society.

Thus, overall, I feel that the justice system have every right to pursue criminal charges several decades after the crime is said to have occurred.

Reflections on Term 2 Expository Test

I am very disappointed after receiving my results for my expository essay test in Term 2. The reason for this was because there was a drop in grade for my results as compared to that in Term 1. I believe the reason for this was that I am really not reading enough and thus, my range of vocabulary is just insufficient.

In this paper, I was forced to do the question on "The Arts should be made a compulsory component in the school curriculum. Discuss." The reason would be that I am totally unsure of the 2 other topics. For the first topic, I could not decide on what social media was, while for the second topic, I was unable to figure out the meaning of "Adolescence" as well as "turbulence" and thus, was unable to do both the questions.

The thing I've done badly for my essay is that I was unable to include as much examples as I did for my explanation to support them. Furthermore, because of my lack of vocabulary, I am unable to explain my pointers properly.

To ensure that I will do better for my other essays in the future, I would try to read more Time magazines as well as books for me to widen my vocabulary. I would definitely strive to do better in the upcoming tests, achieving at least a grade increase from this term.

Comments_Term 2

Comment 1: Lee Liak Ghee (Poem Analysis – The Soldier)

http://leeliakghee2i310.blogspot.com/2011/05/poem-analysis-soldier.html

Comment 2: Lee Liak Ghee (STOMP – Jiang Lai)

http://leeliakghee2i310.blogspot.com/2011/05/stomp-jiang-lai.html

Comment 3: Gaw Ban Siang (AAT Lessons and Syllabus)

http://bansiang2i3.blogspot.com/2011/05/our-uniform.html

Comment 4: Koh Yi Da (Response to a Chinese Debate Topic)

http://2i3numbereight.blogspot.com/2011/04/response-to-chinese-debate-topic.html

Comment 5: Lee Wei Ren (Facebook sued for $1 billion over Intifada page - Should social networking sites be banned?)

http://lolz-teddy.blogspot.com/2011/04/facebook-sued-for-1-billion-over.html

Comment 6: Lu Zhi Hao (LKY’s comments T2P9)

http://2i315.blogspot.com/2011/05/lkys-comments.html

Comment 7: Jonathan Ng (War Poetry – In Flanders Field)

http://ispark18.blogspot.com/2011/05/war-poetry-in-flanders-fields.html

Comment 8: Chin Ming Fwu (Spitting)

http://2i303la2011.blogspot.com/2011/05/spitting.html

Comment 9: Lee Liak Ghee (Are girls the stronger sex?)

http://leeliakghee2i310.blogspot.com/2011/05/are-girls-stronger-sex.html

Comment 10: Kervin Tay (Term 1 Sabbetical – Solar Panels / Renewable Energy)

http://kervin1i3.blogspot.com/2011/04/term-1-sabbatical-solar-panels.html

Poem_In Flanders Fields

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie,
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

I believe this poem was very well-written as it was able to make, at least for me, feel involved in the scenario.

For the first paragraph, I think that the poet was able to start off the poem very well by making use of "poppies" as a symbol to represent most likely the soldiers of the wall. Secondly, it also made use of the line "The larks, still bravely singing, fly" as a great reference to the whole war itself as larks are usually used to symbolize hope. Following this sentence, they spoke about how they heard guns below, most likely trying to relate with the previous sentence and bring out the theme of "Behind every war, there is hope."

For the second paragraph, I believe the poet was able to contrast the soldiers themselves from before they came to war and after that. It is also evident that the soldiers were all dead and "lie in Flanders field" at the time when this paragraph ended. On the first line, the word "short" is used instead of "few", which should then be grammatically correct. However, the usage of short could be used to demonstrate that the days prior to these seemed very short, besides being few. The difference in this would be that "short" would be more to the fact that the days themselves were very short in duration, while "few" would be used to show that the days were very little.

The last paragraph, which is my favourite among the three, is used to show the perseverance of the whole team in fighting the enemy. Initially, I was unable to fully understand it, and I thought the "you" in the paragraph refers to the enemy and the things that "we" throw are grenades and bombs. However, soon after, I realised that it was actually meant to show the teamwork among the team and their perseverance to defeat the enemy and the "torch" was actually a form of symbol showing an obligations of the soldier to carry on the battle. Among them all, I felt that the last line of "In Flanders fields" was able to put a really good ending and period to the whole poem.

Should Singlish be recognized as an official language in Singapore?

Singlish is a very widely used language in Singapore today. But should it be recognized as an official language? Below, I'll be presenting my views on why Singlish should not be recognized as an official language in Singapore.

Firstly, what exactly is Singlish? Well, it is a mix of Chinese, Malay, Hokkien, Cantonese and many more languages which Singaporeans often use, thus getting its name of Singlish. So what so bad about having this language? Well, for one, it would definitely worsen relationships among different races. Because Singlish is a mix of language, different races might mistake one another for what they’re saying easily. Wouldn’t this therefore, worsen the relationship the social cohesion among the citizens of Singapore, which is totally against what the government is promoting?

Secondly, besides having internal communication problems, communication with citizens from other countries would be even worse. Giving an example here, imagine going to England and saying, “Eh, I want one chicken rice, more sauce ah” at a chicken rice store, the owner would either not understand him at all or give him chicken rice with lots of chili sauce instead of black sauce which he intended. Furthermore, if you were to go to a university in Singapore and because you were so used to using Singlish, you might start to blur it out unknowingly. How would your English friends there interpret and understand you then? Wouldn’t this in turn leave a bad impression on the English man, having them think that our standard of English is poor instead of them understanding that it is our language?

Some of you might argue that Singlish as an official language would help in improving the citizen’s national identity of being a Singaporean. No doubt, that would be the case. But what would the use be if the communication amongst one another be degraded to such a state whereby citizens can’t understand each other? Furthermore, it is a universal fact that if you were to adapt very comfortably to Singlish, it would be very hard for you to use proper English as words and pronunciations would just be blurted out without you knowing. If communication cannot be mastered properly, what use is there to speak for our national identity?

Thus, I would re-emphasize my point and state that Singlish should NOT be recognized as an official language in Singapore.

Sabbatical Term 1 (Hwa Chong Proficiency of Communication)

I had attended the Hwa Chong Proficiency of Communication sabbatical in Term 1 and I must say that it was a very fruitful experience for me.

Some who might have gone to this sabbatical might claim that it was very boring as all we did there was to give speeches, listen to speeches, and give more speeches. Well, I do agree that that was all we did, but at the same time, useful tips as well as techniques were taught to us to be more confident, and most importantly, engaging when giving our speeches to a large group of audience on a certain topic. Furthermore, it is undeniable that from the practice we had from presenting speech was able to help many of the students overcome their stage fright as well as give a more persuasive as well as interesting speech.

On the first day of sabbatical, my thoughts were the same as many others; why did I get into this sabbatical of all? The title itself seemed so boring and I thought I was going to waste 5 days of my life listening to crap. However, I was proved wrong on the first day of sabbatical. There were in fact so much more to presenting speeches then what we knew; impacts, rhetorical question, repetition, there were just far too much method that we can use to give an interesting speech, so why are we giving speeches that would make the audience themselves fall asleep?

On the last day of the sabbatical, which is the assessment, I must say that it was a hilarious thing of me to prepare a PowerPoint presentation instead of a speech. Nevertheless, I could see the improvement in me presenting in front of a large group of audience as compared to the first lesson. I was able to be more aware of my audience as well as use some of the techniques which was taught, mainly rhetorical questioning.

I must say that among all the sabbaticals I've been through, this one would definitely be the most helpful to me in the near future. However, I also learnt a very important thing from this sabbatical; never to be complacent in giving speeches as well as to know your own script like the back of your hand.

Does Hard Work Always Pay Off?

"You must study hard to get good results." This is an all-too common phrase we've seen and heard in our lives. But is it really a fact? Will the hard work you put into studies always pay off? Well, I suppose that many might argue that it is, but I must say that it does not pay off all the time.

Given a very generic example here: a students tries to study very hard for this upcoming Science test he has, burning midnight oil and trying to get all t

he facts into his brain. However, during the test itself, he just suddenly blacks out. What's worse, the teacher might even think that this student did not study at all, and may even reprimand him for not working hard enough, where in actual fact he has.

Whereas in this case, the student would be like :

All over again

How depressing and demoralizing would it be then, for a student, who just simply wishes to get a good and rewarding result from all that hard work he had put into studies?

Another example where many people should have heard of: Similar to the above example, one has this really large exam coming up. But on that day of exam itself, he suddenly fell ill and in the end, had to retake the year all over again. Is this all that could be done for this student; to just have him retake his test again the following year? Years and years of hard work before the exam, and he had to retake; just because he was sick?

Thus, I would like to ask again; does hard work really pay off all the time? None of the above circumstances can be controlled. You may argue that if one student is really familiar with his notes, he would never just black out during the test. However, think from the students' point of view for a change; imagine studying day and night for this test, how stress would it be? So I must say, to guarantee a pay off, one should learn to do more smart work instead of just putting in hard work.

Facebook: A Waste of Time?

There has been many arguments pertaining to this issue; some may think that Facebook is never a waste of time with all the games, applications, people you can find there, while others might think that it is a pure waste of time.

The benefits of Facebook, which is what many would argue to be the merits of Facebook and why it is never a waste of time, is that it contains many entertainment utilities like games and cool applications that can show you when you die and what god tells you (Of course, they're just for the fun of it). Most importantly, it allows you to maintain relationships with one another, even after a long time. For example, some things that Facebook can do is to remember all of your friends birthday. I for one, would never be able to remember all of my friends birthday without the help of Facebook, so indeed it is helpful. Furthermore, Facebook can be said to be a "hoster" for many games as Facebook itself does not really produces games for users to play with. Some examples of this very addictive game: Mousehunt, Backyard Monsters, everyone plays them. Lastly, Facebook also allows users to create groups, which can be used for many purposes. Examples of these groups include political groups for publicizing, class groups, and many more. Thus, over more than half of Facebook's 400 million users would say that no, Facebook would never be a waste of time.

On the other hand, there is another small bunch of people who would argue that Facebook is a waste of time. Small, but yes, they do exist. The basis of their argument would be that what Facebook does is make your life lazier, more generically like what technology does. In rebuttal to my previous point on how Facebook remembers your friends birthday, many would say that the sincerity of remembering your friend's birthday would be gone with Facebook. People nowadays no longer depend on themselves to remember their friend's birthday, so what's the use of looking at the day's event before going to your friend's wall and post a "Happy Birthday"? Furthermore, some would find that Facebook is a totally immature form of platform. So what does one actually get for "poking" someone else on Facebook? What's the point of liking all those weird and totally random pages like "The awkward moment: when the Queen confuses the Royal Wedding with a fancy dress party and comes as a lemon." What then is the point of all these pages? Entertainment? Or would it more to be discriminations? Besides, if Facebook was to close down one day, all of these contact information would be gone instantly. For avid users of Facebook, can we assure that they can still live on without it? Lastly, supporters of Facebook being a waste of time can also argue that Facebook can be a very dangerous source of platform for cyber bullying as well as what some call "stalking". As people normally do not "private" their information such as their addresses and number etc., information can be seen by ANYONE and EVERYONE in the world. How dangerous would it be if informations like that of government officials fall into that of terrorists then? The consequences would be severe. Thus, the minority of Facebook users would say that Facebook is not only a waste of time, but also a threat to some.

Well, my stand in this issue is that, Facebook is a waste of time, but it cannot be argued as a platform that does no help to users at all. I, for one, am on Facebook almost all the time away from school. However, I admit that I do nothing in Facebook except for games and staring at the recent news every 10 minutes. A distraction it is, but with the help of Facebook, it has also allowed me to form discussion groups for my friends and I to discuss our project in an easier, more effective platform. Although some may say that the Window Live Messenger would be a more useful tool in this case, Facebook would be a better choice as one would have a higher chance of having Facebook as compared to MSN due to the high popularity of it, especially among teenagers.

Thus, I believe that there are many viewpoints to this issue. As long as people are able to utilize it fully to their advantage and not be taken in by its disadvantage, Facebook would inevitably remain as the best and most popular social networking site.

Task_Featured Article (Task)

Court Case Featured Article

http://www.filedude.com/download/drIO3lFxEHbc32d7f29d

Comments for Expository Essays

For the expository essay exercise done on Thursday, 21 April 2011, I have commented on the following people's essay on their blogs:

Lee Liak Ghee (10)

Low Wei Yang (13)

Jonathan Ng (17)

Ivan Ong (19)

Kervin Tay (23)