Important people of 1I2:
Form teacher: 房老师
Chairman: Wiseley Arfan (DEViLpriNCe)
Monitor: Alvin (3moDuDe)
Secretary: Zheng Hong
Fac. Sec. : Zhen Hui
Welfare Sec. : Marc (smiley)
Treasurer: Andrew

1I2!!!

01. Alvin
02. Sian Wen
03. Raymond
04. Zhen Hui
05. Shian Hao
06. Kee Yong
07. Ting Kiat
08. Graham
09. Wang Fan
10. James
11. Jason
12. Joel
13. Justin
14. Tsun Lok
15. Zheng Hong
16. Bowen
17. Andrew
18. Marc
19. Marvin
20. Jia Hao
21. Nigel
22. Yi Xuan
23. Yew Pheng
24. Eugene
25. Zhong Yang
26. Wiseley
27. Yu Xuen
28. Theodore

February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009

Designer :Xavier Daemon
Basecodes :lovelies-
Scrolling Code: %PURPUR.black-
Others : xoxo

Regarding 3moDuDe( whoever this emo guy is...)'s saying that Hwa Chong boys are not respectful... Could he elaborate on that? How is being silent disrespectful anyway? Also, on a side note, I think that Chun Jie should have been the overall winner. His speeches were well organized and his articulation is great... In all I think that he should have won and not Gui An. Gui An used said everything is Singlish... In case you didn't know, ANGLES means A New Generation of Loquacious English Speakers... To conclude... Gui An doesnt deserve it. I mean Chun Jie deserves it more...

"Imagine you were the relative/friend of someone who was brutally murdered. Let's say stabbed 20 times (yeah, some people survive long enough to feel all that pain) and left to bleed to death. Would YOU want to personally stab every inch of the murderer's body you can get at, and [violently morbid stuff here]? I don't know if you are as sadistic as me, but I would, and yes, I am terribly morbid. No, no one i know has ever been murdered, but I'm just imagining myself in someone else's shoes.

Do you REALLY believe that a mass murderer could turn over a new leaf? I doubt so. What, you think a criminal mastermind could turn over a new leaf? Actually, I agree. If he is smart and cunning enough to mastermind a bank robbery, if his genius is put to good use, then he could be a really good leader. Have you watched the latest Batman movie? My first reaction when I watched the scene of the bank robbery was "wah, pro". If you haven't watched it, do. The Joker backstabbed every single one of his robber-buddies by manipulating them into backstabbing each other, and finally betraying the guy who thought he was the joker's right hand man by putting a bullet into his brain. He made off with all the loot (I'm not sure if Batman stopped him). This is pure genius. Another example could be a book by Terry Pratchett, Going Postal. Sorry for my unsupportiveness of the Yellow Ribbon Project, but I don't like all these mass-crime committing people.

Firstly, 'Would YOU want to personally stab every inch of the murderer's body you can get at, and [violently morbid stuff here]? I don't know if you are as sadistic as me, but I would, and yes, I am terribly morbid' is too strong. No one is as sadistic as that, and then the victim’s family member would only want to get his revenge, not personally administer the killing. I think that the family member would not be sadistic enough to stab every inch of the murderer’s body, instead he would want him to die by hanging. There is a difference.

Secondly, I do believe that murderers, even mass-murderers, can turn over a new leaf. Exceptions have to be made for those on drugs/have psychological problems, because those are factors beyond our control.

Most murderers have a motive when they kill. Those murderers who kill just for the fun of it are, in my opinion, beyond hope. Of course therapy might work, but…

Those ‘normal’ murderers usually have a motive. They operate under greed, lust, spite, and many other sub-reasons. Again, you cannot compare the Joker to criminals, as the Joker is in a movie, and I’m sure you will agree that the Joker isn’t ‘all there’. I mean, someone that laughs maniacally isn’t very representative of most murderers.

Treatment for the ‘normal’ murderers is relatively simple, and with some therapy and rehabilitation, this might of course be possible.

(Here I would like to point out something: I never said that all murderers would be able to turn over a new leaf. However, it doesn’t mean that even those who are serial killers shouldn’t be punished by DEATH.)

"The victim [ offender ] might suffer intense psychological torture after knowing that he/she is going to be executed." You think a man without a conscience feels that kind of psychological torture?

Yes, I do. A man without a conscience still has the sense of self-preservation, and sitting there, being able to do nothing to control his own death while knowing of it is torture indeed.

"This sadism, and 'reverse happiness' might have future negative effects and cause psychotic traits in some, especially if the family member/close friend has been deeply grieved about the murder of the said family member." Of course. He'll never be the same again, especially after the death of a really really really really really loved one."

Perhaps I should have made my meaning clearer – the difference is, without capital punishment, the family member is deeply grieved about the victim’s death but does not experience sadism and gratification about the offender’s death. With capital punishment, the family member does, and that is very unhealthy.

27th Feb — 1st Re-Election of the iCMC

7:40 a.m. - 8:37 a.m.

RESULTS

Alvin - 23 votes - Successfully voted in as monitor (Tsun Lok was the former monitor)

Marc - 20 votes - Successfully retained post of Welfare Sec.

Zheng Hong - 18 votes - Successfully retained post of Secretary (that’s me)

Wiseley - 17 votes - Successfully retained post of Chairman

Andrew - 16 votes - Successfully voted in as Treasurer

Zhen Hui - 10 votes - Voted in as Facilities Sec.

-- Done by Zheng Hong, Class Secretary.

Everyone, this is your new treasurer, Andrew :D . Here is how I can contribute to the class by being the treasurer. I will be collecting money which means I need you guys to be consistent, punctual, don't hand in your money late, okay? I hope you guys will co-operate in this such that you all will develop a habit. A good habit. Of being punctual. Of being consistent. Stop forgetting. All these little things add up to a big change. A change in our lives, a change in your lives, and a change in my life. So everyone, let's work together towards our mission (at least mine lah!) of being a responsible class!

~~ Andrew Loh :D ~~

I thought the ANGLES final would be better than the crappy first round.
However it turned out to be a horrible, bitter judgement done by the consultants and principals of English.
I think that Lee Gui An did not deserve to win the first prize.
Firstly, he used Singlish throught the entire speech. He may be doing a speech on Singapore kiasuism, and it may have entertained the audience, but it was not an excuse to

Now in this current economic crisis, people are losing jobs. Locals are getting retrenched and yet many foreign workers are keeping their jobs! Foreign workers are satisfied with less money than the locals. Thus, the locals are getting retrenched! The government is telling us to keep an open mind, that foreign workers who come in to our economy is to help our economy, saying that they are foreign 'talents'.

Even before the economic crisis, many locals were being fired and replaced by foreign workers. I understand that every boss wants to cut costs for their company. However, foreign workers are not going to help us when a problem occurs. They have their homeland. They can go back to their homeland and stay there while the problem is solved. Will they be faithful to Singapore???? Ask yourself that question. Every local has to serve National Service, protecting a country which does not protect their interests. We are the citizens of Singapore. We are patriotic to Singapore. It is we, the citiezens of Singapore, not we, the foreign workers who work in Singapore who will stay in Singapore. Singapore is our homeland, we have no where else to go to.

Malaysia and the United States have already started to save jobs for their own citizens. Malaysia is stopping new foreign workers from entering. The banks in the United States are saving jobs for their citizens during the economic crisis. Singapore is attracting many foreign students too. Many are from China. You look right into their face you know they china liao. china man! They will not stay in Singapore, they will go back to their homeland, help their own country and leave nothing to Singapore when the government spent so much resources to them. The locals? They have nothing.

By Andrew Loh 1I217

I would like to inform you the results of an experiment done on children who were allergic to peanuts,instead of continuing this ANGLES topic on the blog.Firstly,the test subjects were children(mostly)who were allergic to peanuts.The procedure was complicated,but in the end,a dash of crushed peanuts was put into a cup of vanilla milk.What was the result?

In the end,the 'test subjects' did not react abnormally when drinking the milk!This is a scientific breakthrough as there are many people who are allergic to peanuts.Whatever you eat from your M&Ms(copyright) to peanut butter and then to Toberlone(copyright),it contains a certain amount of peanuts.Even if the amount is small, these people still react to the comsumption of this tiny little peanut powder and have itchiness,soreness,have illnesses or may even die!Therefore,this case is quite serious and I believe that the experiment is a breakthrough in the science industry.
However,the effects were only for a limited time.The medicine could only last for a maximum of 2 years and the children will be allergic to the peanuts again.Therefore,the scientists are trying to find a solution for a long-term medication of this allergy.

I have ended my summarisation of this topic and would like to thank all of you for reading this report(or rather summarisation)of this topic.If you have any views,you might like to comment on this post by writing on the CBox.Thanks for your attention.
~Jia Hao(20)~

How did you arrive at this conclusion that the blogskin would be 'A Bluely feeling'?

I agree with the rest. The ANGLES workshop, while informational, was presented in a horribly boring way. It's ironical that they are talking about projecting their voice, when we at the back couldn't hear them, but I guess it really isn't their fault that the auditorium was so vast and the whole auditorium was considerably noisy. Like Eugene, Bowen and Tsun Lok all said, people were chatting amongst themselves and doing their own things.

I am sure the presenters didn't mean to bore us all to death, but sorry, that is our honest feedback. Perhaps the following could have been carried out to ensure a pleasant (and interesting) experience for all -

1. Give a demonstration on stage. Let some of the previous year's winners give an impromptu speech based on response from the audience (nothing nonsensical, of course). An example would have kept the whole audience interested, rather than droning on and on and on.

2. Keep the audience engaged with a more interactive speech. Like what Theodore said, they were basically reading from the powerpoint slides, and we can read.

3. (In reference to point number 1) Talk less, show more. For all we know, they could be some random people picked from random classes. There is no visible distinction between them and the rest of the seniors. What separates them from the rest of Hwa Chongians their level? What have they done to qualify for ANGLES/3NGLES?

Secondly, I would like to talk about the individual class selections. How can they judge us based on a scale of 10? Like Wiseley said (actually i dictated half his post to him, so really, the end bits are mine) each judge has their own standards, and one may be more lenient or strict than the others. The ANGLES Finalists (namely a few from each class) should have been asked to go for another round of auditions to determine the real elites of Sec 1.

The situation in class with our "judge", Jay Ong, was mildly chaotic. Mildly in the sense that no one in class was running about screaming "I R MASTERCHIEF. ROFLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL." , but chaotic in the sense that no one really cared what the speaker was talking about. It's not Jay's fault the class was chaotic. There was also an abundance of people who spoke... crap, for want of a better word (I acknowledge my part in this crap).

This concludes my stand on the ANGLES workshop. Now I shall talk about capital punishment, as Zheng Hong brought up.

Imagine you were the relative/friend of someone who was brutally murdered. Let's say [insert morbid stuff here]. Would YOU want to personally [violently morbid stuff here]?

Do you REALLY believe that a mass murderer could turn over a new leaf? I doubt so. What, you think a criminal mastermind could turn over a new leaf? Actually, I agree. If he is smart and cunning enough to mastermind a bank robbery, if his genius is put to good use, then he could be a really good leader. Have you watched the latest Batman movie? My first reaction when I watched the scene of the bank robbery was "wah, pro". If you haven't watched it, do. The Joker backstabbed every single one of his robber-buddies by manipulating them into backstabbing each other, and finally betraying the guy who thought he was the joker's right hand man by putting a bullet into his brain. He made off with all the loot (I'm not sure if Batman stopped him). This is pure genius. Another example could be a book by Terry Pratchett, Going Postal. Sorry for my unsupportiveness of the Yellow Ribbon Project, but I don't like all these mass-crime committing people.

"The victim [ offender ] might suffer intense psychological torture after knowing that he/she is going to be executed." You think a man without a conscience feels that kind of psychological torture?

"This sadism, and 'reverse happiness' might have future negative effects and cause psychotic traits in some, especially if the family member/close friend has been deeply grieved about the murder of the said family member." Of course. He'll never be the same again, especially after the death of a really really really really really loved one.

This concludes my horrendously long post. Some of you may deem it TLDR, but yeah, that's what I think. At least i didn't put it in Courier.

P.S. Why is our blog theme "The Bluely Feeling"?

I am not going to talk about the whol;e Wisely was sleeping during Angles thing (Beacause I do not know anything about it) but I am just going to talk about the condition at our classroom. Basically, it was "controlled" chaos. Everyone was doing their own thing after most people gave their speech. Some were walking about and others were not even paying attention to the speakers. They were just talking among themselves. Jay could not control the class after shouting at us to keep quiet.

Eugene

I agree that Wiseley was sleeping and i could i hear the snoring sound coming from him. Most of the students did not have seats and had to sleep on the steps. We could have held the workshop at the auditorium where there are more seats. The workshop was a bit boring and most of the students were restless and could not sit on the seats without moving here and there. Students were chatting among themselves and spoke in low whispers. The teacher-in-charge was aware of this and moved behind and caught wiseley sleeping red-handed. Serves him right. Hehe. Wiseley was startled when he woke up. He may have been having a nice dream.
Bowen

i am going to post to agree with Theodore. Firstly, Wiseley WAS trying to sleep. Secondly, people were playing games on their handphones. Furthermore, there was not enough space in the drama centre, and people had to sit on stairs, especially the ProEd and Ortus people. Next, Jay Ong, even though was a good speaker, was not able to take control of the class.
Furthermore, he was unable to give good explanations for his judgement. Also, the number of people chosen for 3NGLES should not be determined by consortium or number. They should be graded instead by their talent. This means all the speakers should be from the consortiums better than the rest. This ensures that the cream of the crop is chosen.

Thank You

Tsun Lok
No insults were meant.
No offence was meant.
Or intended.

I would like to argue against Theodore's point. First of all, I WAS NOT SNORING DURING THE TALK. I don't even think I was sleeping. Next, it may have been a boring talk, but it was quite meaningful. The rest were busy with their own things because there was no self-discipline. ANGLES is a competition to identify good public speakers. But Theodore was right. The judges were from different class so each had their own standards. I feel that this is quite unfair. This means that the classes with stricter judges are at a disadvantage. I acknowledge that due to time constraints, there was not enough time for every student to be judged by the same judge. In conclusion, ANGLES should have been more organised.

--Wiseley Arfan.

Hello.
My name is Lieu Zheng Hong, and I'm filling in for index number 26 today (as he has 'nothing to post').

I'm here to express my views about capital punishment.

I personally disagree to capital punishment. Capital punishment is usually imposed as the most horrible punishment for an offense, mainly murder. I think life imprisonment is better. (this will be explained later in this post).

First, we need to understand the reason for capital punishment, or punishment in the first place. Punishment is a deterrent and acts as a message, saying "This is wrong. Don't do this again". This punishment deters would-be offenders from committing said crimes, and thus is an effective way of controlling and maintaining public order.

Capital punishment is based on this principle, with the exception of that this punishment has the human trait of revenge, eg. "You kill him, I kill you." However this is completely unacceptable. Punishment should only be carried out for the purpose of acting as a deterrent, and not as to act as revenge for those who are grieving over the murder over their close friend/family.

Of course, one might argue that most punishments inflicted on a offender would cause the close friend/family member some sort of comfort and/or sadistic pleasure at the offender being 'given a taste of his own medicine." Of course, this should not be allowed, mainly being that delighting in the punishments of others is morally agnostic.

However, capital punishment is singularly the worst sort of punishment (death), and thus causes abovermentioned family member/friend to feel a feeling of gratification/revenge stronger than most other punishments inflicted for the offender, thus making the family member/friend become rather sadistic.

So far I have talked about the specific point of view and capital punishment's effects on the victim. Let us now move on to capital punishment's effect on the victim (i.e. the offender).

The offender, of course is killed during capital punishment, so not much can be said on the effects of the victim [offender] . Suffice it to say that the victim experiences the psychological equivalent of torture as the victim sits in his cell, contemplating his own death.

Of course, we also want such offenders to be of use to the society someday -- if the offender is killed, how is the offender going to make amends, and contribute to the economy and well-being of the country? Even life imprisonment (the equivalent of the death penalty in most U.S. states) has a possibility of parole (unless the judge specifically disallows it). In capital punishment, the victim is going to be executed -- pray tell me how he is going to get a chance to make any amends?

To summarise:

The family member/close friend of the victim will be negatively affected after knowing about the offender's said punishment. This sadism, and 'reverse happiness' might have future negative effects and cause psychotic traits in some, especially if the family member/close friend has been deeply grieved about the murder of the said family member.

The victim [ offender ] might suffer intense psychological torture after knowing that he/she is going to be executed. (Of course, one might argue that since the victim is going to die anyway, it does not matter much).

This is why I believe against capital punishment.

--Lieu Zheng Hong

Class Secretary of Sec 1I2

Singapore, 19th Feb 2009, Wednesday

I was unfortunately chosen as the first person to post on this blog.
I have to do something, right?
I therefore am going to criticise ANGLES.
Firstly, ANLGES did not really help us with anything. ANGLES is actually a competition which is meant to improve our writing skills and our ability to communicate with a large audience.
However, the ANGLES workshop was a ridiculously boring powerpoint presentation. Evidence is that so boring that I started to draw bananas on my notes, Wiseley started to sleep and others were playing games on their mobile phones.
The powerpoint presentation was also unhelpful and uninformative. Firstly, the presenters were reading STRAIGHT from the computer. I can read, durr, im nort a reetarded cHarly gorDennnnnnnn. Plus, with Wiseley snoring next to me, how could I concentrate?
Lastly, I would like to talk about how the Secondary 2 seniors grade our impromptu speech. When we have not even finished it, Jay Ong, our "judge", just wrote done some random score on the sheet. Wow. Amazing.
This is my criticsm on the ANGLES workshop, if you you have anything to tell me, post it on the comments.

--Theodore (1I227)