The main thing that I wanted to point out was how Mark Eleven returned the favour that was given to him with disrespect and even calls it a scam.

The reason for giving a point-for-point rebuttal was simply to point out his lop-sided comments… it doesn’t necessary mean that mine are correct. The purpose of keeping a personal blog is not to express objectiveness. The word personal means those were my personal opinions.

I wrote this article simply to express my opinion that it was inappropriate for Mark Eleven to bite the hand that fed him.

I have no interest in inviting any argument, nor am I interested in enlightening strangers. Neither am I frustrated. Why should I be, when it doesn’t involve me?

Having said all these, I must say that SKL’s comment doesn’t seem any less of a personal attack as he claimed my article was… It is just your subjective opinion that my article was written with “emotion, agression and personal attack”. Afterall, how can one quantify aggression and emotion in plain text?

Anyway, I think that this topic has been over-discussed and people are reading too much into it and trying to dissect my message, far from what my original intention (recap: to express my opinion on how Mark Eleven was biting the hand that fed him) was. Thus, I am closing this for comments.

I do not know what is the intention of mrbiao – is it a discussion? Correct a wrong preception? Invite an arguement? or Let go his frustration? Whatever it is, my impression is that the reply is written with emotion, aggression and personal attack. Well, ‘emotion’ has the tendency of producing illogical thinking., ‘Aggression’ will only drive people away and ‘personal attack’ invites confrontation. Why not ? state your opinion and allow the topic to be discussed. We have plenty to learn from one another.

Mrbiao, I hope you’ll reread your article objectively when you have calm down and see for yourself the inconsitencies to what you believed. You can email me if you want more.

But truth are hard to swallow. If Singapore systems are good, it will withstand any criticism. No need bond, no need to even offer this kind of gimmick “scholarship”. Full fee paying students will come in lots if the education is as good as claimed. Think about it.

Our Singapore government has very set views about scholarships and bonds. It is something they have used, tried and something which has increasingly become less effective, if reports over the years, in our media, are used as a gauge.

That said, and back to the main gist of the original post. The ASEAN scholar in question is truly ungrateful. If I were him, I would have been happy and grateful for whatever financial help I can get in my studies. Coming from a country where he is probably discriminated against if he is not a ’son of the earth’. I would expect a little more appreciation for what he is given. I was awarded a scholarship for good academic performance at a British university years ago. I didn’t have to apply for it and it was a small amount, so small it didn’t any difference to the cost my dad has to provide for my studies. But I was happy and grateful for that 50 pounds.

Personally, I hate this legal handcuff thing that the government puts on recipients of scholarship, to locals or foreigners. A better selection process might be to carefully screen the recipients who are judged to be likely contributors who will find joy and happiness staying on in Singapore after their scholarships. Selection of our local scholars should also be on how much the selection process believes that the individual can and will be willing to contribute after benefitting from the scholarships. It is the heart that matters. But alas, like so many other aspects of our dealings with our government, it is grounded in legal framework and a probably water tight contract. Contracts don’t win hearts!

Just because you have a limited vocabulary doesn’t mean that the word doesn’t exist…

Singapore schools are good because the government says so, not me. Having worked in the system, I must say I am disappointed with it.

That said, I think the issue here is not whether our schools are good but why do people come here, take advantage of the perks willingly knowing what they have signed on for and after that blame Singapore for everything.

It is a matter of taking responsibility for your own actions. One cannot take the good and blame our government for the bad even to the extent of false accusations and running away when confronted. That shows an opportunistic coward at work.