Common courtesy, social graces and socially acceptable behavior. All are used in a civilized society where humans interact with one another. Cyberspace is not any different. How you will be perceived, the type of human being that you are or for that matter are not, your credibility and your levels of professionalism and ethics will be judged by how you communicate with others online.
To minimize the importance of established Netiquette Guidelines is to make a conscious decision to be thought of as rude, lazy, arrogant or uneducated. If you are online for commercial gain, lack of proper Netiquette may very well deter those who otherwise may have considered doing business with you.
And this …
Treat others as you would have them treat you. If you find you are wrong, don’t spout claims of self-importance that reflect your dented ego and lack of understanding in regard to the issues in discussion or to communicating online. If you are ignorant, it is because you have chosen to be ignorant. Make the choice to reverse that pattern and learn, learn, learn. 😉
If you choose to do otherwise, you will be thought of in the most undesirable terms, like it or not. Period.
Conclusion? Blog Responsibly.
A lot of ppl (ie. flamers) have said that because Wendy’s is just a blog, so all displeasure should be aired and confined only to the online world. That would be fine if not for the following reasons:
- She accepts endorsements from “real” companies
- She’s treated as a legitimate source of opinion by the “real” Singaporean media
- Her words affect how others are treated in the very “real” society (read: Malays and the disabled)
- She’s a “real” ambassador for the recent Singaporean Quit Smoking campaign
Because of the above reasons, Wendy’s blog is REAL. She herself has blurred the line between what she says online and off. Don’t blame us poor messengers for highlighting her words to her sponsors, blame instead the person who wrote the message in the first place. (hat tip: Mili)
The latest ST article (scan can be found here) just serves to legitimise even more her incorrect and hurtful words. Nice of the journalist to leave out the furore about the racist remarks in her KL post but I guess researching was a task beyond him, considering the article was a thinly-veiled puff-piece.
Still think that those who want to complain about Ms. Cheng’s words should just do it online only? Puh-lease.