In light of some comments posted on this site verging on the defamatory and certain allegations made against particular persons, we would like to remind everyone of our moderation policy.

TOC Moderation Policy

The Online Citizen reserves the right to moderate, edit, disallow, remove or delete comments or postings posted on this website which, in TOC’s sole discretion, are deemed to be inappropriate or are of the following nature:

– Vulgarities – in any language, whether colloquial or slang.

– Personal attacks, threats, insults, degrading or derogatory remarks about the author or fellow commenters or others.

– Racially offensive remarks or language.

– Religiously insensitive or provocative remarks or language.

– Handles, nicknames which contain vulgarity – in whatever form, in whatever language, slang or colloquial.

– Comments which have nothing to do with the issue/s or the articles under which the comments are posted.

– Comments which contain inappropriate hyperlinks or are deemed distasteful, according to TOC’s discretion.

– Lengthy comments which exceed a reasonable length. Comments should not exceed 500 words. Anything more will be subject to this site’s discretion.

– Self-promotion of products or services or websites, including promotion of religions or religious organizations, unless links are related to article under which it is posted. (If you’d like TOC to help promote your website, products or services, please send us an email.)

– Defamatory or libelous comments.

Comments which are deemed to have infringed any of the above will be disallowed in its entirety. That is, should a comment contain any of the above, the entire comment will be disallowed.

TOC will no longer edit comments, or particular words or sentences.

Our hope is that a civil, meaningful and respectful discourse can be had by all for discussion and debate. We will not be a platform for anyone who wishes to use it for any other purpose/s.

TOC reserves the right to disallow any comment at its sole discretion, and we also reserve the right to permanently ban commenters who continually indulge in any of the above-stated prohibitions.

If you should find any content on this website undesirable or offensive or which may have infringed any of the above, send us an email and we will look into them.

We can be reached at: [email protected] .

We ask for your understanding.

Thank you.

Regards.

The Online Citizen

You May Also Like

民主党上诉要人力部长撤更正指示 维持内堂审理

此前,人力部长援引《防假消息法》对民主党三则文章和网络贴文发出更正指示。民主党要求撤回遭拒绝,于是上诉高庭。民主党争取上诉在公堂(open court)审理。 不过高庭发言人告知本地媒体,在明日(16日)进行的审讯仍维持在内堂审理,意味着不会开放给公众聆听。 根据《防假消息法》的上诉程序规则,若不满要求撤销指示的申请被部长驳回,当事者可透过提呈原诉传票(originating summons)和书面证词(supporting affidavit),上诉高庭。 高庭认为所有原诉传票申诉,都安排在内堂审理,而不是在公堂。 民主党在此前的文告指出,此案涉及公共利益,且《防假消息法》也广受在野党和公民社会的诟病,更何况外籍PMET课题亦牵动国人神经。 故此,该党认为有鉴于上述课题可能成为来届选举的热门议题,希望上诉能在公堂审理,让群众亦有机会旁听。 去年12月14日,人力部援引《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》(POFMA),向民主党发布的三则贴文和文章发出更正指示。 本月6日,人力部表示“经过谨慎考量”,,认为民主党的申请没有充分理据,故此拒绝撤回指示。不过并未详细解释,民主党的申请为何理据不足。 民主党也不甘示弱回应,人力部也无法为他们的决定提出理据,并指该党提出申请时,已列出详细理由,包括人力部数据分析和该党贴文的对比。

The Singapore government needs to take both praise and criticism with grace and maturity.

The fact that the ministers in the Peoples’ Action Party (PAP) run…

ST Forum writer: Why didn’t SP offer consumers heavily discounted retailers’ rates in the first place?

A member of the public, Albert Tang, wrote to ST Forum and…