Showing posts with label Other Blogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Other Blogs. Show all posts

Tuesday, 22 July 2008

"Is there such a thing as a happy enbloc?" Jessica Cheam's article online

I'm not sure if this will be published tomorrow or not, but I just noticed that Jessica Cheam, the ST reporter that does quite a bit of reporting on enbloc matters, has published a new article online. You can read it here but I'll quote her last 2 paragraphs (which captures a sense of the enbloc discontent):-

Singapore is a young country, and our en bloc laws are even younger. It is not yet perfect, and what is becoming more apparent in our unique strata-titled property landscape is that these laws have to be tweaked to make the process more transparent and equitable.

This will likely take a long time, and claim many en bloc “victims” along the way. But as long as we do not stop improving our en bloc laws, perhaps someday, we can finally achieve this myth that’s called the “happy en bloc” and urban rejuvenation can happen without the expense of an inidividual’s basic human right to keep his home.


You can read the full text here on her blog 'from the ground up' (nice title) :)

Wednesday, 16 April 2008

Three Perspectives on Land Acquisition

Read three rather interesting articles from three different sources - Business Times, The New Paper (really), and a Blog.

First, A/P Mak Yuen Teen from NUS Business School wrote a letter to the BT Editor, in response to a BT article on Saturday (here) about a possible MinLaw review of the enbloc amendments. The letter really deserves to be read in its entirety (available here) but let me extract some really great points from A/P Mak:

However, I would like to urge the government to go further than that. I hope that we do not approach en bloc rules purely from the perspective of urban renewal or economic development. En bloc sales should also not be driven primarily by the commercial interests of property developers, consultants, agents and advisers, but rather by the interests of those who are personally affected by en bloc sales, be they majority or minority owners, and the wider interests of society.

As we move towards a more caring society and recognise people with more diverse talents than just academic and business success, we should also take into account the wider societal and environmental impact of en bloc sales.

Can we have the moral authority to play a leadership role on the world stage, which is increasingly concerned with wider societal and environmental issues, if we disregard them in our own backyard?

What are the wider societal and environmental costs of tearing down perfectly good buildings and dislocating communities compared to the economic benefits?


Let's hope the government has the foresight, and the courage, to take the higher road of considering, seriously taking into account, the "societal and environmental impact" of enbloc sales. These have been raised in Parliamentary Debates in 2007 and back in 1999, so it's a matter of whether the policy makers and law reviewers want to assume the "moral authority" or not.

The 2nd article is from the New Paper (available here), about a man who refused to sell his home, despite agents badgering him to. While it's about a landed property, his tenacity and refusal to sell his home should be an exemplar to all stayers, whether they live in condos, or landed homes. As he said, "I want to stay here until they have to move me out". How I wish that can be the case in condos!

Finally, a rather interesting enbloc blog "Enbloc Outlook 2008" appeared recently, very quickly populated over the last few days with enbloc news. From my quick reading of it, especially the blog post of 14 April (here), I'm assuming that the blogger is pro-enbloc, and lives in Tampines Court. He/she gave, what I must admit, a good argument for the sale of Tampines Court to be pushed through. Still, while I'd love to argue point by point, recent workload and events have limited me to posting his/her link here. Feel free to write on his/her blog.


Friday, 4 April 2008

Another Plea to Save Another Estate - Clementi Park

There's another estate that is going enbloc and the group of stayers there - people who are fighting to protect their homes - have set up a website to describe their estate and why it should be saved.

Save Clementi Park

Great website! I strongly encourage other estates which may be going through the trauma of enbloc sales, to set up their own blogs or websites. It's a great means of publicising your estate's virtues and your intent to try to save it from destruction oops I mean redevelopment. It can also serve as an information point to keep owners updated on the ongoing enbloc, especially if not everyone is consistently updated. This has been the case in a few estates where the pro-enbloc SCs have been systematically ignoring some people (ie stayers) in their mailings, an act that is not only wrong ethically but legally.

Setting up a simple blog isn't hard. No bells and whistles necessary :)

Monday, 15 October 2007

Enblocs hit Facebook!

Now this is what I call social networking and social awareness! Who would have thought that people who love their homes would set up networks online :)

Facebook which is a social networking site (amazing site - I discovered 2 long lost friends so far!) has been in the news lately for its addictive ability to suck you right into searching online for friends, colleagues, enemies lol. The principle used is six degrees of separation - find a friend and chances are his friends are friends that you know as well etc.

Amazingly, facebook has also become a site for a small group of people who love their homes - Pearl Bank to be exact - and have used it to network. You can find that group "Block the En Bloc (Pearl Bank Chapter)" here. (Note - you must be registered and logged in to view the Chapter.)

Now let's see who will set up the next enbloc support groups (or "Chapters" I guess!). For that matter, I'm just waiting to see if an 'Enbloc Windfall Huat!' (Huat is a hokkien term for 'striking lucky') group will appear. Likewise, maybe someone should start up a "Say No To Enbloc" group too lolol :)

For new users - it's really easy to set up facebook accounts. The more information you enter, the better its ability to network to other people you know - from primary school to university, from workplace to social clubs. Warning - it's addictive.

Print Page

Sunday, 9 September 2007

Is This Possible? A Transparent Sales Comm?

I found this pro-enbloc blog set up by the Bedok Court Condominium Sales Committee. (They have an older one here.) Now normally I would not advertise pro-sale blogs since there's hardly a need to broadcast them (they have plenty of resources from the agents to do their own advertising).

However, this blog is interesting in that it looked like they took the higher road of announcing all their meetings, % voted, % present, minutes from the meetings, who are the sales committee, where they stay, what were the motions passed, who were the agents they contacted etc. In other words, they are in many ways attempting what the new amendments would like sales committee to do on their own accord - to be as fair, transparent and equitable to all owners as possible.

It's a good step towards ensuring the enbloc process respects both majority and minority owners.

What I'd like to see in the Bedok Court blog though -
  1. Activating the comments so that people can post comments on the meetings say, and get feedback from the sales committee. If the SC is attempting to be transparent, why stop comments?
  2. Minutes of the SC meetings to be put up as well, so all Bedok Court owners are kept informed of the discussion and important issues raised therein.
  3. The ability for owners who are not keen to sell to have a dialogue with the sales committee, and have this dialogue in a public space such as the blog (or an internet discussion forum etc).
Too often, I've seen sales committee ignore and disrespect non-signatories and people who may choose not to sell. The mentality is that if they can achieve 80% they don't need to care about the remainder. What I'd really like to see, is a sales committee who endeavour to do their utmost best to get every owner on board, and to address concerns that minority owners may have, especially if it's sentimental reasons. For example, I've not seen any sales committee work with their marketing agent to secure or obtain replacement units for people who wish to stay in the same area. After all, how hard is it for the investment division of a major estate agency to contact their sales division and attempt to work out a good deal on behalf of minority owners who wish to remain in the vicinity?

I can only hope Bedok Court will take the high road, and not the bulldozer road (ie bulldoze through everyone until you obtain 80% then bulldoze the minority completely).

Thursday, 6 September 2007

The Horizon Towers Story Compiled Into a Blog

A chap calling himself "Enblock Victim" has painstakingly gone through over 1000 postings and more, to compile the Horizon Towers case into a blog. Now if anyone has even visited the CondoSingapore forum thread on Horizon Towers (currently standing at 1344 posts!), one would immediately find tons of irrelevant (troll) postings which just seek to flame other posters. The fact that CondoSingapore allows unregistered postings has unfortunately helped fuel trolls. But Enblock Victim went through pages of it and compiled various thoughts, comments on the matter into his blog.

So you can read the rather lengthy, but salient, points of the HT case here. Enblock Victim - great work there :) Will update my links accordingly :)


Monday, 3 September 2007

A Dissenter's Point of View - From a Lawyer

Found this on the internet. Mr Ong Ying Ping of Ong Tay & Partners gave a presentation recently about enbloc sales, but this time from a dissenter's point of view and from a legal perspective. I believe Mr Ong runs a Singapore Law Blog which does tend to go offline often but you can try it here. The actual powerpoint slides (in pdf format) are available here.

Some very interesting points were raised by Mr Ong around the theme: "Would it be better to revert to the original position before the 1999 changes ie with 100% consensus?" He gave a number of cases that I'm unfortunately unable to access (will try dropping into the Law Library to see if they have it), but here are some of his points:-

  1. Residual method of valuation is often used (Chew Ming Teck v Collector of Land Revenue and Anor [1991] SLR 8) and may be a point of contention.
  2. Can a MC council member abdicate all responsibility of overseeing the conduct of the SC, especially given that it is their responsibility under the BMSMA to control, manage and administer the estate?
  3. Mr Ong raised many points about CSAs which are addressed either on this blog or in the upcoming amendment bill. But one point he raised was this - when an EOGM is called to "consider the sale" (as required by law), does this mean that the activity is purely an informational one - SC announces a sale is achieved with a developer etc, or is a resolution required to be passed, in which case a vote may be called for? He referred to Sim Lian (Newton) Pte Ltd v Gan Beng Cheng Raynes and Anor [2007] SGHC 84 which unfortunately was in May 2007 and out of the 6 mth archiving by the Supreme Court online. So if anyone knows this case please let me know the details. Still, some CSAs have built into it that anyone who signs it MUST vote in favour of any motion or resolution passed by the SC (rigging the vote).
  4. Finally, Mr Ong pointed to the possibility to apply for a "Declaratory Order" for out-of-control pro-sale groups. If anyone know what such an order is and how does one apply for it, I'm sure people here are very keen, especially considering the previous poison pen letter from Tampines Court.
So if anyone could dig out the judgments for the above cases, and what this declaratory order is (sounds like some sort of restraining order doesn't it), do let me know :)

Saturday, 1 September 2007

Will New Law Make Poison Pen Letters a Thing of the Past?

I just saw this flyer sent out to owners at Tampines Court, written by someone who views him/herself as a majority owner. You can view the flyer at the Tampines Court blog (here). I'm disheartened by the distinct element of threat included in the flyer.

The very idea of dividing an estate up into two camps is built right into the enbloc protocol. So long as there's an arbitrary 80/20 (or 90/10) requirement for majority/minority consent in a 10 yr+ estate (another arbitrary number), the estate will invariably be split into two, often opposing, camps. The difference in the past and now is that the minority group is getting more vocal, present, more organised and importantly, more knowledgeable in the facts surrounding enbloc sales and their rights.

Will the new Law make such poison pen letters a thing of the past? Not likely at all. Until the government begins to address the social and psychological impact of urban renewal, rather than the procedural and legal aspects, the ugly side of enbloc sales will continue to exist.

Thursday, 24 May 2007

Another Anti-enbloc Blog - Botanic Gardens View

Well, this is a disappointment.

I've always found that Botanic Gardens View was an excellent example of what a good management council could do to an aging estate - by pursuing an aggressive upgrading and maintenance policy to upkeep the property, and improve it's sale/rental yield. Situated at Taman Serasi, facing the new buildings at Botanic Gardens, this estate is over 30 years old (built in 1970) and while it does not have much in the way of facilities, its location is really superb - next door to the Gardens, near a hospital, at the doorstep of Orchard Road, embassies nearby etc.

Heard from a colleague who stays there that there were talk of en-bloc early this year, then everything went silent, and today CBRE wrote to everyone, telling them that the protem sales committee (PTSC) has selected the agents and lawyers, the CSA is almost ready for signing at their FIRST owner's meeting. They're fast tracking it, obviously hoping to hit the 80% before parliamentary changes to collective sale legislation occur later in the year. Included in their proposal is the application to maintain the gross plot ratio of 1.78+ (their existing buildings are 10 storeys I think, but the current Masterplan plot ratio for BVG is 1.4 or 5 storeys should they wish to redevelop.) Can they do that, given that there are explicit restrictions to the area around Botanic Gardens, as clearly outlined in the Masterplan 2003 and the circular, where it states "the current height restrictions will remain to protect the visual amenity of the Singapore Botanical Gardens"? This of course applies to new redevelopments near BVG and not to BVG which was built before MP2003's revision.

Not good news from my colleague who loves the place and whose family calls it home. A group of owners there have started a blog (it's still new) to gather dissenters to the enbloc of Botanic Garden View:- http://botanicgardensview.blogspot.com

Residents of the estate do feel free to express your thoughts of the enbloc at their blog.

Sunday, 20 May 2007

Resistance is NOT Futile - Anti-Enbloc Blogs on the Rise

[Added a post below. Keeping this post as first entry for now]

It is always difficult being the minority, whether it's in terms of collective sales, or other markers of differentiation (race, ethnicity, SES, and even those with different political views). Some say the internet is a fantastic avenue for opening up spaces for such minorities. Maybe it is, but a lot depends on how visible these spaces are.

So what I have found, and have been approached to connect with, are other 'anti-enbloc' blogs that have appeared recently. I'm sure others will appear in the near future, as en blocs continue to frustrate many owners who do not wish to sell or move, for various reasons.

Anti-En bloc Blog for Teresaville (Lower Delta Rd): Save Teresaville
Anti-En bloc Blog for Pearlbank Apartments (Outram Park): No Enblock!
Anti-En bloc Blog in General: Pariah's En Bloc Block

Some advice from yours humbly that's been running this blog for a while now:-
  1. Always have a way for others to contact you, be it comments or (better) email.
  2. Advertise your blog on technorati, google, etc for maximum publicity.
  3. Link up with other blogs (like those listed above) for visibility.
  4. Search around the internet for others that may have talked about your estate's en bloc attempt, and invite them to discuss in your own blog.
  5. Try not to moderate your blog. If you're pushing for transparency in collective sale attempts, the same should apply to your blog. It's only fair that even majority owners have a right to say something on your blog, even though you may not agree with their comments.
  6. Most important of all - be civilised and rational. En blocs can create rifts and tempers may flare, but you gain nothing by being irrational against others who may disagree with you. It's an ugly world out there, but that doesn't mean you have to be too.
If there are other people that are attempting to start their own anti-enbloc blogs for their estates, let me (and those listed above) know. Of note, and I won't publicise it here, is the fact that there are signs of pro-enbloc blogs online too :) :)

Good luck :)

UPDATE:
This from Channelnews Asia - Members of Parliament to raise questions about the property market, including "measures to ensure that en blocs are transparent". START BUGGING YOUR MPs NOW!!!!


Friday, 18 May 2007

So What If It's The Biggest En-Bloc? One Youth Laments the Loss of her Home.

This from a blog by a growing youth who stays in Farrer Court. When someone so young could write about the impending loss of her home, and her emotional attachment to Farrer Court, I'm heartened to know that there are youths like her who have not (yet) been tainted by material greed.

So what if Farrer Court's going to be the biggest collective sale ever. To this young lady, the loss of her home is immeasurable. Sometimes, people lose sight of their soul in the pursuit of progress.

From xiaoyuan of "leave me alone", a youth living in Farrer Court, her home. [Changed from SMS Engleesh to somewhat more standard English lol]

[anyways] one damper
the damper really very big lor...
[anyways],we were driving past the gates of farrer court
then saw the words COLLECTIVE SALE outside
mummy said "don't think i lie to you
really yao mai [going to sell] lar,they passed the 80% needed to sell lar"

at first thought i okays coz i seem to be getting more okays
then in the car,my tears just rolled down when i thought of my home
[remembered] on monday night was walking thru lingx's nice neighbourhood on monday night,it's really nice,really really nice
but even as i walked thru, i knew it wasn't farrer court,my home
the feeling was different and i missed my home
it's the place i return to after coming back from overseas trips,from sleepovers,from work,from sch
in this insane world,it anchors me in my world
my small private haven in which i healed and grew up and lived here for 18+years
and the feeling of walking back home at night via the hc way as in from the back is magical
it's irreplaceable, it's special, it has a healing effect on me
farrer court is my private haven,really my home
it's beautiful
...
but i can't help feeling quite heartbroken
i am losing one of the most [important] things that mattered to me
i have lost so many things over the years, i healed in farrer court
now i'm losing my home and private haven and one of my protection against the world thanks to some [people]
the nightskies are beautiful from all parts of the world
but it will never be the same as the one you see from farrer court
and i just feel like telling those _____
"U HAPPI NOW LA!
YOU'VE WON LA
NOW YOU WILL EARN MONEY
YOU HAPPI NOW?!!!"


Wednesday, 28 February 2007

Excellent Comment with Numerous Valid Points

A chap by the name of "Pariah" posted this in my comments, what must arguably be the longest comment ever made! Nevertheless, he/she has made some very valid points in his cogent arguments about En-blocs. Do have a read through... I particularly liked his idea in point (7) on a more rigid structure for allowing subsequent en-bloc bids to occur. This will be useful for owners who do not wish to be traumatised by repeated attempts, year after year.

Pariah - thanks for your very thoughtful, and well-argued comments! It heartens me to know there are others out there, and I'm not a lone rambling voice in the wilderness.

From The Pariah, posted 26th Feb 2007

In this New Millennium, the spate of Collective Sales has hit those of us in Districts 9 and 10 where East meets West, as Dr Minority puts it so elegantly.

1. Constitution. Is it even constitutional, I wonder? Perhaps, it is only in this little red dot where North nearly meets South where a law could be passed in 1997 with such equanimity by a Parliament of 82:2 mandating collective sale of Privately-Owned property based on 90% share-value majority if your estate is less than 10 years old from the date of issuance of TOL (Temporary Occupation Licence) or 80% majority if 10 years or older. Should a collective sale of a property bought prior to the enactment of this law be subject to this 90% (or 80%) majority?

2. Impact vs Regulation. What is even more galling is that after passing this "innovative" piece of legislation in 1997, they have conveniently left a huge void on everything else related to it.

2.1 To sell the entire estate - there is no regulation or legislation to govern the Sales Committee who dictates the terms of such collective sale and the apportionment method of sales proceeds that are binding on ALL owners. The Sales Committee might as well be a "Committee of One" because - naturally - only like-minded owners will be invited to join. Also, shouldn't the law legislate that the Sales Committee be auto-dissolved once the CSA attempt fails to garner the requisite share-values?

2.2 To repair a broken lock in the estate - There is an entire statute under the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act to regulate the Management Corporation.

3. Paradigm shift. Pray, let's not be hemmed-in by the marker lines drawn for us.

3.1 Labels of "majority" versus "minority" are misplaced. We are talking about Private Property that we bought at prevailing market prices with our hard-earned money. No government subsidy. Not dipping into taxpayer's money. Are we living on some communal farm all of a sudden when it comes to collective sale?

3.2 10 years! This would be hilariously funny if it wasn't so tragic. How long did your fridge last? Mine is still frightfully cold after 13 years! Man, we are talking about bricks and mortar here. The law says "less than 10 years" and "10 years or more". The first CSA attempt on my estate was four years from TOL - even the central air-conditioning system provided by the developer to me was still under warranty!

3.3 What kind of Master Plan does our MND drum-up when the land use/plot density ratio could be hypothetically out-of-sync from Day 1 of TOL issuance? Hongkong is now talking about 40 years whereas in Singapore we have been slapped with this CSA potential/risk from Day 1 of getting TOL. Bizarre, no?
On our finite-resource Planet Earth, wouldn't it be more sensible to bar CSA for the first 20 years from TOL at a minimum?

4. Property share-values. Dr Minority has done his homework about share-values approved by the Commissioner of Buildings. The share-value bands were only narrowed recently and hence the legacy problem was created by COB in the first place. The esteemed Commissioner apparently did not have the foresight to envisage that a self-appointed Sales Committee of a collective sale could apportion sales proceeds based on such Committee's totally arbitrary formulae/weightages pegged to share values.

5. Apportionment method. A rocket scientist it does not take to derive a mathematical basis of apportionment. Searing as this may sound but it is unconscionable that the Strata Title Boards sanctions such arbitrary apportionment method of sales proceeds by a self-appointed Sales Committee.

5.1 At the time of purchase, you pay for every sq cm of space. Every month, you pay for every share value as approved by COB.

5.2 Now, based on a collective sale forced down your throat if you are amongst the dissenters, you are obliged to accept the apportionment based solely on share value or some dreamed-up weightage even though your apartment is 50% larger than your neighbours.

5.3 Apply a mathematical basis of apportionment. The ratio of "common property" versus aggregate "strata title area" could be established by a quantity surveyor (eg, 1000 sq m of common property of the estate versus 4000 sq m of aggregate strata title area of all apartments - ratio of 1:4). The collective sales proceeds, say $15mn, should then be divided into these proportionate ratios. Hence, $3m would be apportioned based on share values of each apartment and $12mn would be apportioned based on the strata title area of each apartment, thus mathematically and factually accounting for the full apportionment of such collective sales proceeds of $15mn.

6. No-brainer. In most estates, the larger units are invariably outnumbered by the smaller units. It is a no-brainer when it comes to apportionment method because the majority of the owners who own the smaller units would naturally vote to use share-values-only or to assign a weightage to share-values favourable to themselves.

7. High-rise slums. Estate maintenance of a development with CSA potential/risk is a Catch-22 issue. In high-density high-rise living on a little red dot, high-class slums can evolve willy-nilly in our Global City. We should have a scaled time-bar for next CSA attempts relative to the estate's age (eg, no CSA for less than 20 years from TOL; 5-year time bar after a failed CSA attempt for estates between 20-40 years from TOL, 3-year bar for estates above 40 years). If owners have an assurance that this CSA cycle has a timeline (and not going into infinity), then the quality standard of buildings in Singapore will be upkept and maintained properly.

8. Financial planning/CPF. Most of us would have used CPF monies substantively to buy a private property. CPF policies ostensibly encourage prudent and stable investment of our CPF monies with net positive gain over time. Hence, the CPF criteria are more stringent for investment properties versus owner-occupied properties.

8.1 The greatest irony is CSAs are almost guaranteed to result in an investment downgrade or downsize for owner-occupiers who need a replacement unit (if new replacement unit) or constant churning of investment (if old replacement unit as yet another CSA is likely to eventuate). This does not even take into account that real estate investment is truly unique - Unit #01 may be much less favoured and therefore worth less than Unit #02 even if both are in the same block on the same level with the same design layout.

8.2 All of us have different cashflow needs, risk appetites and investment-risk/time-horizon profiles. However, CSAs enforced on dissenting owners in effect communalizes all of us into "cashing-out" our original real estate investment.

9. Architectural legacy. Ever notice the difference between apartments built in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s? With all this urban renewal from Day 1 of TOL, what architectural legacy could we even hope for?

10. Community bonding. We are losing our citizens despite our near-First-World trappings. We talk incessantly about community bonding but our policies do everything to DIScourage bonding.

10.1 We are after all human and being human, we tend to be territorial. If we are serious about community bonding, principles similar to HDB SERS should be applied to CSAs to keep a sense of neighbourliness and community - more so for the people with private properties (and their children) are likely to be more mobile in terms of migration possibilities.

10.2 As the developer/buyer of an estate under collective sale is tapping on the land use potential belonging to the original unit owners, developers could be obliged by law to offer a same-size replacement unit at the redeveloped estate or within a 1-km radius of same or higher quality.

10.3 Interestingly - in contrast - Singapore can't even seduce our Permanent Residents to give up their Malaysian, Indian or Mainland Chinese passports despite whatever commonly perceived downsides of these countries at present.

11. Environmental impact/wastage. Again, we have a senseless contradiction. We harp on Asian values, of which frugality is one. Yet our policies foster wanton wastage as gleaming marble floors of less than 10 years or even of 25 years if well-maintained go under the wrecker's ball. It takes an obscene amount of energy to produce a ton of aluminium window frames and yet it's kosher to twist them all up with a CSA and to smash all these double-glazed full-height windows to smithereens?

12. Individual versus Minority versus Majority. However hard we try, I reckon Singapore will not become a Global City of First World Standard in essence (perhaps in trappings, we can pass it off).

Why? Because the hallmark of such places at its peak is giving people the space to grow and evolve into a rich pluralistic diversity yet with a strong commonality. Underpinning their society, there is invariably a healthy respect for the individual (what more for the minority?).

Sadly, we Singaporeans have learned to be a parrot-society veering to a convenient singularity with highly selfish motivations of kaisuism. Instead, underpinning our society, we have tyranny by the majority - be it in HDB Lift Upgrading or Private Estate Collective/En bloc Sale.

Knowing the mass media's pro-CSA slant and the dearth of civil society in Singapore, I have not even bothered to write-in to the mass media. Instead, I have chosen to give grief directly to our humble civil service and statutory boards and whatever mouthpieces the government has deigned appropriate for us to squawk into.

Only Time will tell if the powers-that-be really "listen". And if they did in fact "listen" but can't or won't take what we say into account for whatever reason (valid or otherwise), then at least they could "talk-back" so that we dissenters to collective sales at least would know why we are being led to slaughter, eh?

Let me end off by saying that - at the bottomline, we Singaporeans know the Price of everything but the Value of nothing.

Sunday, 18 February 2007

En-bloc blogging - Another Voice

I was searching the internet for other blogs that might've talked about en-bloc matters, and found, purely by coincidence, the author of one of the ST Forum's letters - Mr Waleed Hanafi. What was even more interesting was that the letter published on the ST Forum, was censored or edited. The original (and more critical) letter was reprinted on Mr Hanafi's blog, located here.

His blog is Innocence is Curable and he wrote another post on the topic as well. Worth a read! :)

It isn't easy trying to get your letter published in the Straits Times Forum, both printed and online. I've tried before (several times) without any luck. Even when the letter is (in my opinion) well argued and written, it is not a guarantee that the forum editor will agree to printing it. Censorship or plain practical editorial considerations (given the limited space)? We'll never know. But if you've attempted to send a letter about en-bloc sales to the Forum and it never appeared, do let me know. I'll be glad to print it here.

A Happy Chinese New Year to the Chinese readers, in the meantime :)