I am penning some thoughts after starting Jokes @ xblogger some 2 years ago. With over 700 jokes on the blog, many of which had been sent to me by my close friends who thought I enjoyed jokes on email. I doubt any of them knew that it would used for publication on blogs. Though I frankly do not know who the original author of those jokes were, but dammit, I laughed my ass off at each published jokes.

When I first started that blog, there were a few wankers who came and told me off. I should not be doing a cut and paste blogs. But frankly, these wankers and hypocrites are doing exactly what I am doing. Let me tell you, Google do not pay much for these sort of websites. Not that I am planning to make any money from them.

The reason why I started that blog was to share some laughters with the rest of the world. Let the world laugh with me or at me, doesn’t matter, as long as they are laughing. After I joined ping.sg, I realised that there are readers of that blog. They gave me encouragement to look for better jokes each day. And the one that made me laugh the most would make it to the front page. Yes, believe it or not, I actually took time to filter through my mails and pick the best.

Now, it has become one of the most viewed blogs among the xblogger series of blogs and from the encouragement that people has given me, I will continue to find some of the best jokes around us.

Well I guess this is my morning’s short rant. Cheers and have a good laugh today, yeah?

I read with interests on this shadowfox post.

From my last two posts on Nuffnang, it seems that Robb Chew is now officially practising the silent response method to all posts which may be deemed negative by him. But by doing so to xblogger.net, he will officially now be known as someone who bullies the weak even though he is rather weak with legal matters himself. So I suppose I can call him Dumbo right? No, not the elephant Dumbo, that would be an insult to the Disney character, but rather low IQ, dimwitted, etc. I will give Robb one last chance for him to have his say, otherwise I will deem that whatever I have said is true. I believe 3 warning posts on him to have his stand is quite reasonable. I believe he couldn’t answer my queries because it force him to an embarassing corner. If he truly believe what he has written, surely answering my queries would be as easy as ABC.

Now, this shadowfox post is interesting as I noticed that in recent times, you see all this kap chais coming out and telling the world how Advertlets are not paying them. And you will probably notice that these people are mainly from Malaysia. These are usually the pimpled face kids who probably haven’t earned their days keep in their entire life. Yet they can say things like how they use to like Advertlets and now Advertlets sucks just because there is more “unanswered” queries on the blogosphere about Nuffnang’s bully tactic.

It didn’t originate from yours truly, but rather being picked up from here. Fact that I noticed that their PR skills are lacking wasn’t just within the last few days but quite some moons ago. For one, I believe it is their sheer arrogance that they feel they are the premier blog ads aggregators that have cultivate themselves into this mould. Timothy the founder of Nuffnang has superb marketing skills, but naturally he couldn’t be everywhere at the same time, so a few gremlims managed to steal the limelight and now do not know how to react to the publicity generated by their “wrong doings” of bullying the weaker people. Timothy, if you are reading this, you know I have followed your blogs eons ago and I do wish you sincerely all the best in your business, but I do hope that you would not practice “bullying the weak” as what had transpire in Robb’s last foray into bad publicity.

The other thing about what Shadowfox had written about click fraud on Advertlets. Yes, I think that theory is quite possible. My busy bees have been telling me about this group who operates in Malaysia that inter click one another’s ads to make money from Google. They would attempt to click fraud others like I had been once. But thanks to Google vigilance, they knew it was someone trying to sabotage my ads. Hell, unlike shadowfox who has no ads, these ads are a good pocket money. And most of these pocket money are given directly to my kids. If I have to survive on ads for real money, i would have died of starvation faster than someone in Etophia. But these groups do survive on blog ads for their main source of income. Let me furnish further on Shadowfox claims. Just look at the shareholders of Nuffnang, then you will get what I mean. Busy Bees told me that he had been invited to join the gang but politely rejected it because it was outright unethical. But these people within the group continue to tell the world how ethical they can be and they abhor any unethical conducts even though they have been practising so for the last dunno how many years. These people will have retribution one. I curse curse curse them (hmmm.. i think i had curse someone like this before) and make sure they go to the 18th level of Hell. LOL, just a note, I don’t normally curse someone like this unless they are deemed 100% hypocrite by me.

In my last post on Nuffnang, I had meant it to be one of the last post in a series on Sisuahlai for there is nothing more to add. I did note that Robb was quick to reply to all queries whether from me or from others on that thread until I asked something which he couldn’t reply. Or perhaps he had learnt best not to respond to negative publicity (not so in this case, as it was more of a negative post on Robb Chew and NOT Nuffnang). However, in this case, he had tried to avoid answering my question to which I have no choice but to write and entire post and ping it and hopefully will gather enough attention to warrant his reply. Let us see okay?

In my previous post, I have somewhat felt Sisuahlai had suddenly turn himself to be like every other authority fearing blogger who at the sight of threats would remove his postings. Then at the opportunity of being given back his privilege, he would take it even though it meant compromising his integrity. To think I wrote a couple of posts supporting him. But this post ain’t about supporting him but rather to deal with the issue at hand.

Having done law in my undergraduate studies, I have seen many who misuse their tiny knowledge of law to bully the weak. I always felt law favours the rich and powerful. Not unless you know it more than them.

A very good example would be Singapore’s NKF TT Durai. He thought he was an elite. He thought he had the backing of the government (note that Ho Ching and Mrs Goh, wife of SM did come out and support him). But he has forgotten that he was suing the GOVERNMENT media mouthpiece, The Straits Times. For his arrogance, he was punished. He thought he could sue for defamation even though what The Straits Times have written is true. You cannot forget the basic of the law. In order to prove defamation, you must acknowledge that what was transmitted, in this case, written media, was malicious and had material loss and hence defamation.

Now back to the issue at hand on Nuffnang. To be exact Robb Chew of Nuffnang. And if he had the approval of his boss for that particular response, then it would be Nuffnang. There was no material loss as there is no mass exodus of publisher neither was there any sponsors who had felt threatened with Sisuahlai’s posting. So it is almost impossible for Nuffnang to prove any material loss as a result of their so called defamation.

Then they have to prove that the graphics in question in malicious in intent. One good test would be the “reasonable man on the street” standard. A quick way of finding out is to pass the picture to any reasonable person of sound mind to see how they interpret the graphics if they do find it offending to nuffnang.

It has never been easy to prove defamation and even now, public felt that Vincent Tan’s case had perhaps been tainted with allegations of Lingam involvement.

So my question remains to Robb as to who had actually dispense that defamation advice to him, and if it was a legal firm, it would be interesting to see how that legal firm conclude that there was defamation. There is no point quoting sections of laws if you don’t apply it correctly. And best if you can find precedent cases to it and apply it to show how defamation may have occurred. Perhaps my knowledge in defamation law has been outdated or may be lacking. And if so, by pointing out to me facts would help me improve my interpretation of such laws.

If Robb had written that letter by himself without any legal help, I believe an apology should have been given to the “victim”. Just help make the world a better place, do not let people who may think they have knowledge of certain things bully those that are less well informed.

Having been away from the blogosphere for one whole week (without blogging longest since february this year), I came back to see how Sisuahlai had been banned from innit for 2 months. I managed to catch Shadowfox posting on this before I managed to pen my opinion on the whole affair. His basically as usual summarise everything you need to know. It is so good that there is nothing much I need to add except a few examples and the issue of sacking the person who handles Nuffnang PR department.

It is funny how this Robb Chew handled the entire affair. I remembered once I commented how Nuffnang staffs are really bad with PR, and Timmy did ask me for the “offending” comments. But being a person who never bookmarks things that I read, I couldn’t find the link. But I guess this Robb Chew has given me a good chance at making my point clear that Nuffnang does sucks in PR. Again, allow me to categorically state that I am in no way against Nuffnang, be it personal or professionally. In fact, I think very positively of Timothy, though not so much of his partner, as I feel Timmy is a great marketing guy (though I think Shadowfox might not agree with me on that).

To put it in a better perspective, let me say, if i criticise how Malaysia is run, am I less patriotic? In fact if anything, I am more patriotic than those that has chosen to be quiet. So in some ways, Sisuahlai had been more proactive in hoping that Nuffnang could better their management or at least provide a response to clear the air. This Robb guy who probably still sports pimples in his face, told sisuahlai to fuck off from Nuffnang. This is like if I criticise Malaysia and then Badawi comes up to me and say, “Mate, please fuck off from Malaysia”.

This post is not to support that Sisuahlai has been doing the right thing but rather he had been doing nothing wrong. The legal world can be a cut throat world as I have many dealings with lawyers on almost a daily basis. Shoot me some of the biggest law firms in Malaysia, I have dealt with their partners before. But coming up with a threat of defamation, omigod and unless Malaysia is still in their Lingam runned kangaroo courts (think Vincent Tan’s case against MGG Pillay), do you know how hard it is to prove defamation? My first instances of looking at that picture, damm i think i didn’t even get to see the picture before sisuahlai removed it, but did see it at Shadowfox’s blog was I couldn’t even get the message IF there was a message. I think most commenters noted that there was no subliminal or even conscious message within those pictures.

To show yet another prove, for those who had done some studies with laws on defamation (which I did in university) there was this case study of two bright students from London that went around protesting in McDonalds in UK. I cannot remember what the issue was, but there was a blatant defamation as the two people did defame McDonalds. But instead of pleading guilty, they went on to claim trial. McDonalds with their heavy duty Queen counsels that costs millions of pounds per week (I wonder how many quarter pounders they have to sell to recover costs), decided to rattle this two students into submission (bullying tactics which major corporations use). When news of this hilarious court case got into the street, people began rallying behind the two poor students and decided to help them (it is like RPK asking for RM1 for bail even though he can afford it many million times over it). Right from the start, everyone knows McDonalds will win. But at what expense? McDonald afterall is a publically listed company and owes a fiduciary duty to stakeholders. But yet it could because of some overzealous director with a pea sized brain decided to sue the ass out of the two students. In the end? McDonald’s did win but during the time of the trial, they had so many bad publicity that would make Robb Chew looked like a bloody saint.

Occasionally we see big corporates trying to bully small fries into submission. This is the traditional old thinking PR. Robb Chew in essence (and maybe either he or his close buddies) have been leaving anonymous comments on many blogs protecting Nuffnang from his mistakes. This is yet another show of bad PR. Perhaps Robb Chew has been over confident that he has the support of “juveniles bloggers” (as termed by Shadowfox) that he knew that they will come out and protect Nuffnang at the slightest negative publicity, that he dared to write the email that he did write. If only he went back and took a look at what he has written and reflect upon them.

How to do good PR? Hmmm.. I will not elaborate here but will write something on it in one of my blogs next time. So? Sack Robb Chew and Free Sisuahlai!