Opinion on Issues

Just another WordPress.com weblog

On “blocking”…

leave a comment »

From Ella:

And no, sweetie, I could not have blocked or bannned you from my site for the very simple reason that I DID NOT know your IP address.

There you go again. Did I ever say you blocked me or banned me from your site? Where, in any of my posts did I say that?

The careless assumptions really astound me.

… So now, I can do the blocking hehe

Oh, so there’s the caveat.

No problem. It’s all up to you.

At the end of the day, everything boils down to what you really want to do.

Written by issuesopinions

Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:44:24 +0000 at 7:44 pm

On “Huling Pagtingin”…

leave a comment »

From Ella:

O huling pagpansin. O huling pagbibigay ng atensyon. Huli na ito, opiniononissues. There are more worthy bloggers and commenters out there to quote in this blog.
…But you will still kiss my dog

 

Screen Cap of Huling Pagtingin at Ellaganda.com, Feb 13

Aba nakalimutan mo yata kung alin yung basis ng dare mo (na baseless pa rin) pero sige, sasagutin ko yung mga puntong ni-raise mo tungkol sa comment approval.

 

1. Logic

Sana mo yung logic na pinagbasehan ko ng hinuhang nabasa mo yung reply ko.

May dahilan naman siguro akong isipin na na hindi nga in-approve yung reply ko.

Feb 11 ko pa na-send yun, umaga.

After lunch, walang approval.

Gabi, walang approval.

Hatinggabi, walang approval.

Yet, me mga additions ka na nga at revisions na na-address incidentally yung mga kinuwestyon kong punto na andun mismo sa reply ko sa yo.

Yet sinagot mo na yung mga puntong nilahad ko sa blog ko.

Kung nakasagot ka nga sa reply ko, ibig lang sabihin nabasa mo nga.

Apparently you read about my reply given that you addressed my comment in your addendum. Siguro naman alam mong nag-send ako sa yo ng comment kasi yun yung intro ko sa blog ko.

Here it is, my Feb 11 post:
Screen Cap of Feb 11 post at issuesopinions.wordpress.com

Note what I stated in that post.

Nag-link ka din kay Marocharim and nung time na ni-link mo yun, yung post na nire-refer mo nung sinasabing mong “nagkandarapa akong ipakit kay marochim “ay ito:

Screen Cap of opiniononissues post at marocharim.com, malice in wonderland, feb 12

Note the content of that post. Note the timestamp.

Ni-refer mo yung marocharim post. Sa marocharim post naman nakalagay na mismo yung link ng blog ko.

Na pinagbasehan mo ng addendum post mo.

Maaga pa lang yesterday, Feb. 12, nakita ko na yung addendum post na yun.

My reply to your addendum on the other hand, the one where you based your quote on, was only submitted yesterday afternoon.

Meaning sa time na sumagot ako, nabasa mo na yung reply ko.

Ikaw na mismo ang nagsabi:

I was going to take a screenshot of my comments page on February 11, 2010 to prove that your extremely long comment (na mas mahaba pa sa post you’re commenting on) was not there. But there are a number of “whisper” comments that are for my eyes only. So hindi puwede.

Sinabi mo rin na:

The comment you’re talking about, siguro saksakan kasi ng haba ay napagkamalang SPAM ng Akismet. Click here for the start and here for the end. Notice it’s between spams? (sorry wala akong snagit to capture the entire page)

…at heto pa ang sinabi mo:

I understand you’re a newbie blogger so please refer to a previous post “Not Spam” before reading further.

Nabasa mo na, alam mo na, pero di ko naman nakita yung approved reply ko bago ko pa itaas ang blog na to.

Kung alam mong me reply ako, kung sinasabi mong wala sa comment box mo, kung alam mong malamang nasa spam kasi mahaba, logical ba na isipin kong kahit alam mong nagreply ako, hindi mo nga talaga in-approve? In all possibilities automatic naman yatang iisipin mong nasa spam kasi me blog entry ka pa nga on spam and akismet.

Me tickbox namang “not spam” sa ipinakita mong feb. 11 screenshot as far as I see it.

So tama bang isiping pwede namang i-tick yun as not spam saka i-approve?

 

2. Intention

Sana kinumpleto mo naman yung kwento:

Here are my posts:

Feb 12 :

I submitted my reply to your site yesterday morning.

Lunch time came, no signs of the comment’s approval.

There were revisions like you replacing the title: To OpiniononIssues: , you claiming that the MO is familiar, you scratching out the word panties and a bit of edits here and there that would take longer than pushing the approval button. I saw the revisions on your site and 2 other comments that were approved thereafter but still, no signs of the reply I sent to you on your blog.

You were able to revise and edit some of the points I zoomed in on my reply to you, so I thought you may have had time to approve my comment.

I crossed my fingers, hoping you would allow it to be posted.

Comments were piling up but my reply wasn’t visible anywhere in the list of those approved.

Feb 11

This is my reply to Ellaganda’s post in her site addressed to opiniononissues.

I sent my reply this morning but apparently she still hasn’t approved it. I checked it just now and 2 new comments from other post readers have already been approved.

Crossing fingers she will, still.

In case she doesn’t though, I’ll post my reply here and include a screen cap of her original post as well.

I was reading about you not approving other comments from visitors whose views you do not like, yes.

Pero sana you took into consideration that I suspended my judgment, gave you the benefit of the doubt.

Nag-antay ako i-approve mo reply ko di ba?

Nung Feb 11, chini-check ko every now and then yung blog mo bago ko ituloy yung posting sa blog.
Umaga pa yun.

Nagdesisyon akong mag-post na rin lang ng linksdirected to my blog sa sites na binaggit mo sa blog mo, madaling araw na ng Feb. 12.

Nilagyan ko ng note na reply ko yun sa post mo and na nag-aantay pa ko kasi para liwanagin na kaya ko lang inilagay yung reply ko sa blog na to eh dahil di nga na-post sa blog mo.

Nag-post lang ako saying na hindi mo na hindi mo nga talaga in-approve yung post ko, hapon na ng Feb. 12.

And I mentioned it ONLY because you were putting malice into my setting up a blog, insinuating that:
Screen Cap of Ella comment on blog set-up of opinionissues.wordpress.com

That’s when I explained to you kung bakit dito ko na lang nilagay yung reply.

That’s when I posted this:
Screen Cap of Opinionissues quote on Ellaganda.com

Wala akong intention banggitin pa sana yung yung di pagka-approve ng reply ko pero as you can see in the screen cap, binanggit ko na rin lang kasi kelangan sagutin ko yung accusation mo re the setting up of this blog.

I hope sa pagpapaliwanag ko sa yo ng logic na pinagbasehan ko plus kung ano intention ko and ano yung mga kinunsidera ko, you’ll now see why i said hindi mo pinost yung reply ko.

I just hope you put the time element into consideration so we can see everything in their proper context.

As to that missing reply, no worries, andito na rin naman sa blog, ok na rin.

Cheers.

Written by issuesopinions

Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:41:39 +0000 at 7:41 pm

On “But you will still kiss my dog”…

leave a comment »

From Ella:

O huling pagpansin. O huling pagbibigay ng atensyon. Huli na ito, opiniononissues. There are more worthy bloggers and commenters out there to quote in this blog.

…But you will still kiss my dog

Huh?

You dared and I quote:

If you can prove that Beting Laygo Dolor is one of the founders of PCIJ, I will eat your panties in public in front of a hundred witnesses. But if you cannot, you will french kiss my dog in public, in front of a hundred witnesses.

Put up or shut up.

I already answered your baseless claim but I’ll sum it up again (you can just refer to my original reply so you can see the didactic version of it).

I do not have to prove something I never even claimed. Your accusation is baseless on these grounds:

1. I did NOT refer to BLD as one of the founders. Check my post.

2. You accused me of something I did not even do.

You claim:

Normally, I would ignore a “rotting”, old school black propaganda like this pero idinamay mo ang PCIJ, a well-respected, two-decade-old institution of professional investigative journalists sa basurang ikinakalat mo. Because they dared speak the truth!

Nowhere in my post did I say anything against PCIJ. I didn’t even have any links or quotes from any PCIJ articles.

Here’s a snippet of my previous answer to you.

Please refer to my post. Note that I just listed a rundown of the media and journalism outlets that that name is connected to. I researched on the personalities behind the “expose” and their connections to such media/journalism outlets came up.

PCIJ just happened to appear in the search along with the other establishments. It’s not the only voice front mentioned.

Why are you zooming in on PCIJ alone? Why would you go as far as inventing supposed accusations against it nowhere visible in my post?

3. In the same breath, you again accused me:

You are imputing that the post in Daily PCIJ was a favor granted to one of its founders.

Where in my post did I ever say that?.

Check if you can ever find such a claim.

I do not even understand where your accusations are coming from but definitely,  you can’t find any such statements in my post.

Having said that, do I not even deserve a simple sorry instead of you asserting: 

…But you will still kiss my dog

Mali ka na nga, baseless na nga yung pagdi-dare mo, tapos ako pa rin dapat susunod sa gusto mo sa dare na inimbento mo.

You really amuse me.

Anyway, thanks but no thanks. Not interested in kissing YOUR DOG.

Written by issuesopinions

Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:32:44 +0000 at 7:32 pm

Mahaba nga yung post…

leave a comment »

I agree, mahaba nga yung post, so puputul-putulin ko na lang.

Sasagutin ko bawat puntong ni-raise mo para pagkatapos nito sana malinaw na.

Para sana naman tapos na at grabe, nakakapagod na to talaga.

Written by issuesopinions

Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:48:42 +0000 at 6:48 pm

To the one who’s being accused of supposedly paying me…

leave a comment »

I think kelangan ko ‘to sabihin in consideration of the person na pagdududahan na syang pinapatamaan na “nagbabayad” daw sa kin. Paid daw kasi yung mga posts ko eh.

To quote from Ms. Ella:

…para hindi ka nabibistong astroturfing (PR-speak) aka trolling (net-speak)

Astroturfing
– the act of PR agencies placing blog and online forum messages for their clients, in the guise of a normal “grassroots” user or comment.

– posting paid opinion pieces to public forums under an assumed name. Astro Turf is fake grass, hence the term.

Sorry po sa sinumang pagdududahan dahil sa akusasyong nakadirekta sa akin. Dahil me akusasyong binabayaran daw ako, yung kasunod na hinuha dun me nagbabayad supposedly.
Hindi ko alam kung san pinagkukuha ni Ella mga ideya nya, ayokong patulan mga paninira nya pero I think I owe it to you, nonexistent you may be, so I can clarify the answer to this accusation.

Sorry at pinaako ka ng bagay na wala ka namang kaalam-alam (parehas tayo, wala din akong kaalam-alam). Kakausapin ko po si Ella dito. Sasagutin ko tong  pagpapaduda nya.

Ella:

Sinabi ko na to. May mga taong pwedeng concerned lang talaga. Kung nagtyatyaga man sila pag-aralan yung isyu kasi alam nila yung responsibilidad na nakaakibat sa anumang salitang binibitawan nila. Pwedeng interesado sila sa pinag-uusapan, importante sa kanila yung pinag-uusapan, gusto rin nilang makipagtalastasan pero gusto nila gawin to sa maayos at masusing pamamaraan.

Pinagsisikapan kong maging isa sa mga responsableng taong tulad nila. Kung pagre-research lang ang magagawa ko, eh di yun yung gagawin ko. Kung me mga taong magtyatyagang magtanong at makinig sa opinyon ko, eh di sige makakipagpalitan ako ng kuru kuro. Pero habang di naman kelangan ang opinyon ko sa ilang bagay, sapat na sa kin na tumulong pag aralan yung mga iba’t ibang aspeto ng isyung pinag-uusapan.

Wala akong maalalang binira kita sa kahit alinmang post ko. Palagi kong sinasabi na yung isyu mo and Cabral, sa inyo yun, yung korte na bahala mag-usap sa isyu nyo. Palagi kong sinasabi na yung concerned ako eh yung kung papano dinidefine ng iba yung freedom of expression and speech everytime they set your case as an issue… Sinabi ko rin na hindi yata tamang pinagsasabong si Cabral at yung blogging world dahil labas naman yun sa isyu, pabigla-biglang paglalahat na yun.

Sa pakikipagtalastasan ko sa ibang site, sinabi ko na hindi dapat i-incite yung galit ng iba, i-stoke yung fire nila, sulsulan kumbaga na laban ito ng gobyerno at mundo ng blogging, david vs. goliath, makapangyarihan vs. walang kapangyarihan kasi hindi naman tamang ganun yung palabasin ninuman. Is it about somebody powerful preying on a hapless blogger? Hindi naman ata. Pareho naman kayong me koneksyon at me kapangyarihan.

In the post you referred to, I never formed any conclusion nor pushed any opinion. Mga detalye lang yun na tingin ko me relevance sa pinagdidiskusyunang isyu so makakatulong yun sa pagtitimbang ng mga tao sa iba ibang aspeto ng pag aanalisa nito.

Sa akin, yung naging epekto nung pagkakita ko ng mga impormasyong yun, naisip ko and mas lalong lumakas yung opinyon ko na: hindi naman dapat pala talaga palabasin na laban to ng makapangyarihan o walang kapangyarihan, na pangha-harass to ng may koneksyon sa taong wala, na simpleng pangbubu-bully lang yung isyu and hindi paghahanp ng katarungan at katotohanan. Pareho naman kayo me koneksyon, pareho naman kayo me posisyon na me kakambal na power sa kanya kanyang larangan, eh bakit yun pa yung slant na dapat tutukan?

Naisip ko baka hindi naman intensyon ng iba na yun yung palabasin, baka lang kelangan lang ng dagdag na panahon, dagdag na pag-aaral. Kung makakatulong yung konting detalye para maging balanse yung usapan ba’t di natin gawin? Ba’t kelangang iiwasan? Nasa net naman lahat. Puwede namang masusing pag-aralan. Wala din naman masama sa mga detalyeng pinag-usapan.

Masama ba na konektado ka sa media? Masama ba na malawak yung koneksyon mo sa blogging and net community?

Hindi naman di ba?

In the same manner siguro na hindi rin naman fair na isipin ko o ninuman na dahil konektado si Cabral sa gobyerno, automatic eh bully na sya, nangha-harass na sya, ginagamit na nya posisyon nya para mang-ipit ng iba.

Yun lang naman opinyon ko. Ni hindi ko na nga sinama sa post ko kasi wala naman ako balak i-impose kaninuman.

Just trust that people too have a mind of their own. Allow them to think for themselves, form responsible opinions of their own. Naniniwala naman kasi ako na kung presented naman yung facts and details ng maayos sa kaninuman, lahat naman siguro gugustuhing maging balanse sila sa pagtitimbang.

I am one of those na nagta-try maging fair sa paraang alam ko, sa paraang makakayanan ko. Walang nagbabayad sa kin, hindi kailangang bayaran pa ako para magkarun din ako ng interes o concern sa mga bagay na me kabuluhan.

Kawawa din naman kasi yung taong mapagkakamalan ng iba na nagbabayad supposedly when in fact, hindi naman talaga.

Kahit para sa kanya na lang, kaya sinagot ko tong particular na accusation na to.

Sa akin, ano naman, hindi naman kasi talaga totoo, eh.

Nasa sa iyo na lang kung anong gusto mong isipin.

Written by issuesopinions

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:29:36 +0000 at 6:29 am

Reply to Ella’s Addendum

leave a comment »

From Ella’s Blog, read Friday, Feb 12, 2010 9:40

Addendum ulit:

Opiniononissues ulit:Joskohnaman, dong… or dang? Pakialam mo kung magdagdag ako sa original post ko? At least nagdagdag ako sa sa site ko… na DATI na. TATLONG taon na!

Err, take a deep breath. What I’m trying to say here is the reply I posted was drafted to address your original blog entry. It was what I read first, you addressed it to me, so I replied to it.

You said:

Hindi katulad mo, biglang nagtayo ng blog, nagkukumahog na, kandarapa pa. Sobrang emergency ba para maka-rebuttal ka at ipakita kay Marocharim? Sa WP.com, it takes about a minute and voila! Instant blog! Grabe, nakakatawa ito masyado, kulang ang lol smiley.

note: I heart Marocharim, sobra (Winner, Best Commentary Blog, Philippine Blog Awards 2009) Ang galing-galing niya. Pumalakpak talaga ako sa ending eh. Basahin ‘nyo yung sagot niya kay opinionblahblah. Sana kasing-galing niya akong magsulat *sobrang inggit*)

Let me address this and please stop the tirade for a while and listen.

I submitted my reply to your site yesterday morning.

Lunch time came, no signs of the comment’s approval.

There were revisions like you replacing the title: To OpiniononIssues: , you claiming that the MO is familiar, you scratching out the word panties and a bit of edits here and there that would take longer than pushing the approval button. I saw the revisions on your site and 2 other comments that were approved thereafter but still, no signs of the reply I sent to you on your blog.

You were able to revise and edit some of the points I zoomed in on my reply to you, so I thought you may have had time to approve my comment.

I crossed my fingers, hoping you would allow it to be posted.

Comments were piling up but my reply wasn’t visible anywhere in the list of those approved.

I’ve been reading a lot about you not approving comments and yes, i thought, it may be a possibility that it won’t get posted. Though it veers away from my idea of fair play and balanced discussion, yes, i understand that it’s your call and whatever you wish to do as regards comments approval, it will all be up to you.

You have been dissecting me and my post in your blog though, putting meaning to my entry that was never my intention in the first place, so I thought my reply deserves to be read as well.

You do not expect that you can go on bashing people,  basing everything on your assumptions, yet deny them the right to be heard, too, do you?

I agree  it was only yesterday I posted an entry but that was because I never intended to set up a blog to address your issues here in the first place.

I have now, though, because you denied me the right to be heard in your web space.

You addressed your post to me, devoted one blog entry to me yet when I replied to address your aspersions, you did not allow it to be shown.

You expect to continue bashing me, dissecting my reply, posting your interpretations for the world to see, yet you wonder why I need to set up a blog where I can post my explanation?

I have to post the earlier drafted reply so I can answer you point by point on your malicious, out of this world imputations.

I never planned to set up a blog.

This blog has been registered days or maybe even a week before this entry was posted. I only registered it because some sites required that I log in when I post my comments. I tried to register but I wasn’t able to actually use this account.

Till it came handy when you chose not to post my reply.

Yes, naisip ko i-post na lang dito yung reply ko sa yo. Tutal ayaw mo naman ako makapa-explain sa site mo.

Hindi ako nagkandarapa as you put it para maka-rebuttal at ipakita kay Marocharim. That’s a lot of accusations in one statement.

Ilang days na naka-register ang blog, wala sana ako balak gamitin for posting purposes.

Yung rebuttal na sinasabi mo, my reply, umaga pa tapos na yun. Inantay ko lang approval sa site mo.

Lunch time, wala.

Gabi, wala.

Maghahatinggabi, wala.

Ganun ba yung nagkakandarapa? Nag-antay pa na magbago ang isip mo?

Nagkakandarapang ipakita kay Marocharim?

Bakit ako magkakandarapang ipakita sa kanya?

Saka why are you zooming in on him, specifically?

Sino si Marocharim? (Pardon me, Marochim. In case the question gets taken out of context again, I am just stating that you shouldn’t be singled out. There’s no reason for you to be. I have no reason whatsoever to do that because I do not know you personally and I had no idea about you or your site prior to the DSWD-Ella issue.)

Ano ba yung meron Ella para yun na naman ang isipin mo?

Note that you indicated in your comments the sites where i posted. Therefore, sa mga sites na yun din ako nag-post ng link na reply ko sa yo since yung comment ko dun yung inaddress mo.

Di ko alam ba’t nilalagyan mo lagpas-lagpasang interpretation lahat.

You said:

O wag ka nang magtangkang mag-deny, opinionblahblah, na-screenshot ko na rin ang blog mo. Ang byuti ko lang ang post mo as of NOW, ako lang ang nasa archive mo, nag-iisa, unika iha, one and only, first and last love mo hehe.

Ba’t ako magdedeny, eh totoo namang yung reply ko lang sa yo yung naka-post dito. In-explain ko na sa taas kung bakit.

Saka kelangan din naman siguro kitang sagutin. Masyadong marami ka nang idinadamay and kung pababayaan ko lang na paniwalaan ng tao yung sinasabi mo, hindi naman ata tama yun. Lalo lang magkakagulo. Yun ba yung gusto mo? Kaya nga pinapaliwanag ko sa reply ko yung maling akala mo, ayaw mo naman makita ng ibang tao. Post ka naman ng post ng mga akusasyon and mga kung anu anong pagdududa mo. Di mo na nga tinitigil, dinadagdagan mo pa ng dinadagdagan ang akusasyon mo.

Siguro naman, nararapat ding ipaliwanag ko na mali ang mga hinala’t akusasyon mo.

You said:

Shet sayang, hahangaan na sana kita kasi galing mo ring mag-Inglis. Pero mahina ka sa planning eh. You did not foresee this, aminin mo na! Dapat noon ka pa nagtayo ng blog, mga two weeks ago siguro, puwede na, para hindi ka nabibistong astroturfing (PR-speak) aka trolling (net-speak)

Alin and di ko na-foresee? Alin ang aaminin ko? Planado ba lahat ng to? Mahina sa planning, ibig sabihin nagplano?

Aba, di ko yata makita yung logic bakit kelangan ko pagplanuhan ang pagsagot sa blog. Pinagpaplanuhan ba yung concern? Yung mababasa mong magkakarun ka ng interes o di kaya’y makita mong isyung nararapat tutukan?

Nabasa ko lang yung balita sa inquirer about a govt. official supposedly harassing a blogger. Nagbasa-basa ako. Halos yung mga nakikita ko panlalait o masasamang salita tungkol sa Secretary and sa DSWD. Nung binasa ko naman yung mga diskusyon and analysis nung ibang pinagsikapang alamin yung katotohanan dito, mukhang maayos naman yung mga sagot at gawain ng mga nasabing taong gobyerno.

Nung nagbasa-basa pa ako sa mga comments and forum, napansin ko na medyo mainit yung mga ibang blogger sa mga taong gobyerno. Yung parang naging laban na tuloy, blogging world vs. govt. official, nawala na sa pinaka-isyu.

Nabasa ko rin na may mga Congressmen na napasali na din. Nalaman ko pa na ini-equate na ng karamihan sa pagkawala ng freedom of expression and freedom of speech yung pagfa-file ng kaso sa yo.

Whatever your take is, I respect that pero sa kin kasi, my take is: wag tayung padalus-dalos. Wag natin gamitin yung isang kasong ni hindi pa nga napagdedesisyunan para maging battlecry ng freedom of speech, freedom of expression or internet freedom.

Yun lang namn yung concern ko, yung pantay at mabusising pag-aaral sa isyung ito. Yung pagtutok sa tunay na isyu.

Di ako kelangang bayaran para makabuo rin ako ng sarili kong opinyon.

May mga bagay na di pinagpaplanuhan, lalu-t lalo kung wala ka namang intensyong makaapak kaninuman.

Again, gusto ko lang lumabas katotohanan. Nadiskubre ko lang na hindi lang pala si Sec. Cabral yung sinasabi na makapangyarihan dahil sa posisyon nyang co-terminus and mawawala din naman. Ikaw din pala makapangyarihan kung media o internet o mundo ng blogging ang pag-uusapan. So inisip ko lang na siguro, tigilan na natin yung pag-aakusa kung kani-kanino na gamit ang isyu ng anumang kapangyarihan na yan.

Di ba kung ikaw ang aakusahan ng harassment o bullying dahil marami kang koneksyon sa media, mas lalo na sa mundo ng blogging, ayaw mo yun?

Naisip ko lang na in the same manner, di rin dapat akusahan ng iba si Sec. Cabral na gumagamit ng kapangyarihan sa pangha-harass at pambu-bully dahil lang sa rason na nasa posisyon sya.

Generalization yun na matatawag. Hindi lahat ng taong nasa posisyon, may masamang intensyon.

Hindi ko rin sinasabi yung kabalintunaan ng pahayag na yun dahil wala akong sapat na basehan para magsalita ng laban o kampi sa pagkatao nya.

Yung nakikita ko lang sigurong punto eh na tama na yung patutsadahan na low-blow matatawag.

Di naman kasi yun yung issue. Nada-divert lang mga tao sa talagang punto.

Nagagamit lang yung issue para pati yung critical na topic like freedom of speech and freedom of expression mas lalong lumabo.

Kung nababasa mo nga yung iba kong blog posts sa ibang sites kagaya ng sinasabi mo (oo, ako din si weighingmatters), makikita mo dun na yung sinasabi ko lang, tumutok na lang kaming mga miron sa punto ng responsible blogging and iwasan namin yung atakeng balahuraan.

Hindi naman kasi tamang sasabihin natin na dahil me posisyon at koneksyon, pag klinaro ninuman yung pangalan nya at ng opisinang pinapanguluhan nya, awtomatiko, me maitim na syang motibo. Nakita ko naman sa pag-aaral ko ng isyu na ikaw din pala marami ding koneksyon sa media at sa mundo ng internet na pwedeng magsalita para sa yo. Pero nakita mo bang inakusa kita na naghaharass ka din? Nakita mo bang me nilagay ako na opinyon dun na sinabi ko na nambubully ka din? Wala. Kasi alam kong mali na magtapon ng akusasyon kahit kaninuman.

Sabi nga nung comments sa site mo:

Kutitap Reply:

February 11th, 2010 at 10:50 pm

Naku, nag-mamala-nuno sa punso itong si Opiniononissues… Sa internet-speak, troll baga. Ang sakit sa bangs… Ahahaha!

Naisip ko tuloy, bakit ba ganon nlng ang dedication nya na mag-research?

Isa pa, mukhang intensive naman ang pagkakasaliksik nya. Subalit, datapwat, ngunit, alalaong-baga… bakit mukhang nahilaw ang conclusion? Manibalang pa, hininog sa pilit.

..and:

Para namang ang hasty ng conclusion ni opiniononissues. Talagang pinipilit na iconnect ang mga bagay na may gap pa din kahit pagdugtungin.

..ang sagot mo naman:

Hi Kutitap,

Kulang yata sa prep time…

Here’s my explanation kutitap:

Nahilaw ang conclusion, sabi mo. Hindi nahilaw, wala talaga. Ayokong maglagay ng opinyon dun.

Hindi ko isinama ang opinyon ko sa post na sinubmit ko sa ibang sites, kasi ayokong i-impose ang opinion ko sa iba.

Nag-research lang ako, sa tingin ko maidadagdag yung mga detalyeng yun sa pwedeng timbangin nung mga concerned sa issue, i shared it with the sites which are focusing on this topic. Naniniwala kasi ako na kaya naman mag-isip ng iba, na marunong din tumimbang yung iba. Kung anuman opinyon nila, as long as yung detalye ng iba-ibang eh sides nakikita nila, mas makakatulong yun.

Kutitap said:

Para namang ang hasty ng conclusion ni opiniononissues. Talagang pinipilit na iconnect ang mga bagay na may gap pa din kahit pagdugtungin.

 

Again, wala akong ginawang conclusion dun. Wala akong balak gawan ng conclusion yun. Wala akong pilit ikinu-connect.

Hindi ako si Ella, hindi ako si Cabral, hindi ako yung court na me sapat na impormasyon sa iba’t ibang aspeto ng issue na to. Yung kaya ko lang gawin pag-aralan yung isyu at mga detalyeng makakatulong para matimbang  ng maayos yung sitwasyon.

Kaya nga yung mga post ko sa ibang blog eh sinasabi kong wala akong karapatan o sapat na kaalaman para magsalita about the DSWD-Ella case eh.

Yung pwede ko lang pagtuunan, yung mga general issues na pinipilit i-confuse and i-infuse sa issue na to: blogging world vs. govt. official, harassment of a blogger, bullying of a blogger, excesssive use of power, responsible blogging, freedom of speech, freedom of expression… Sabi ko nga masyadong malawak and critical yung mga isyung to and magiging myopic yung tingin natin kung gagawin nating synonymous yun sa merits ng kasong DSWD-Ella.

You said:

Teka, teka ulit, bigla ko ‘tong naisip. ‘Yung sinabi ko sa itaas na “PUT UP or SHUT UP, hindi ibig sabihin nun eh PUT UP A BLOG! nyahahahaha! Ooowned!

Baka nga talagang hindi lang tayo magkaintindihan.

Baka nga nilalagyan mo ng interpretasyon yung mga bagay na dapat eh hindi naman.

Pero sige dahil mukhang nag-eenjoy ka naman, hahayaan na lang kita basta’t alam ko naman kung ano ang katotohanan.

Written by issuesopinions

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:24:44 +0000 at 6:24 am

In response to Ms. Ellaganda’s post addressed to opiniononissues

leave a comment »

This is my reply to Ellaganda’s post in her site addressed to opiniononissues.

I sent my reply this morning but apparently she still hasn’t approved it. I checked it just now and 2 new comments from other post readers have already been approved.

Crossing fingers she will, still.

In case she doesn’t though, I’ll post my reply here and include a screen cap of her original post as well.

Screencap of Ella’s Original Post:

Screen Cap of Ella's original post at Ellaganda.com

To Ms. Ellaganda:

May I quote you on this:

I’m not sure what to call you, isang netizen na kulang sa pansin o mahilig lang makisawsaw. Ikinakalat mo kung saan-saang sites ang template ng rumor mongering mo, na feeling mo ay mga “bomba”. Mga “well researched revelations” na ikagugulat ng mundo.

I’m not sure what to call you, isang netizen na kulang sa pansin o mahilig lang makisawsaw. Ikinakalat mo kung saan-saang sites ang template ng rumor mongering mo, na feeling mo ay mga “bomba”. Mga “well researched revelations” na ikagugulat ng mundo.

Screech… Brake… Have I used the same words to describe the way you handled your DSWD “expose”?

Are other people not allowed to be concerned about this issue as well? Do we have to be “kulang sa pansin” o “nakikisawsaw” or inciting “rumor mongering” just because we are concerned about how the discussions on the matter are inadvertently veering away from the issue of responsible blogging and is being focused instead on a Government official vs. blogger slant?

If you but notice, I only presented quotes from your own site and links. Are we not even allowed to do some research on any issue we’re concerned about before we form our own take on the issue?

Had you done your own research before casting aspersions against me, you will notice that I have consistently stated in some sites that whatever the results of your case may be, it’s up for the courts to decide. If you win, you win. If you don’t Cabral wins. It’s between you, Cabral and the courts. I did not post my take on the issue because of you. This whole DSWD-blogger issue is no longer just about you.

What I am but concerned about is the furor this is creating online and in the media. Having read the posts online, there were allusions to govt. official vs. blogging world scenario, government vs. freedom of speech scenario, Ella’s case representing the blogging world’s sentiments scenario…. That, my dear, is what I am concerned about.

Some solons and the media have already dipped their fingers on this matter and it would be but fair that if they deliberate on it, people like me who are concerned about its effects on the shaping of Cyber Laws, would at least be well-informed.

It would help if we have a balanced view of the whole spectrum. It would help that before we assume Sec. Cabral is using her office to harass a blogger thru the media and thru NBI(as is the running sentiment on some blogs), we should at least be aware of the type of access you both have to the avenues she has taken.

There are still a good number of net people, including me, who care about responsible blogging, responsible net guidelines and how they’re gonna be defined in our Cyber Laws in the making.

If people say this case is gonna affect freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I hope it would be for the better, leading to responsible freedom of speech, responsible freedom of expression. Founded on details, founded on facts…

You said:

Hindi lang sa isang site, lahat ng madaanan mong “kampi” kay ella, iniiwan mo ang basura mo.

 

My. Check where your foot is going, miss.

If you do a little bit of research, these blogs are the ones that allow easy posting and they are the blogs that have commentaries on this particular issue.

If you also google the topic, you will realize that they are the sites coming up.

I post in the sites I visit. I post in the sites who are as concerned about this issue as I am.

I didn’t even know they were “kampi” kay ella.

Nowhere in my posts on their sites did I accuse them of that.

Are you saying they are?

I sure hope it’s not true. I sure hope they are “kampi sa katotohanan” rather than “kampi kaninuman”.

I hope that the very reason they permitted the posting of such researched links is because they also are after balanced views as some other bloggers are.

You said:

Normally, I would ignore a “rotting”, old school black propaganda like this pero idinamay mo ang PCIJ, a well-respected, two-decade-old institution of professional investigative journalists sa basurang ikinakalat mo. Because they dared speak the truth!

 

Old school black propaganda?

When other people who do not agree with you ad infinitum speak their mind out, it’s black propaganda? When you say your piece, it’s “freedom of expression”?

Doesn’t this issue now involve everyone who will be affected by the cyber “freedom of expression” and “freedom of speech” the furor has spawned?

Can we not do our own research so we can weigh things and not just take your position or the other bloggers’ as our own?

Will it automatically be a “rotting”, old school black propaganda when people research and study the other avenues which will help them see the issue on a broader perspective?

And papanong idinamay ang PCIJ?

How?

Can you check the post again and point out where there is any mention whatsoever of any negative contention against PCIJ?

Are you trying to push an opiniononissues vs. PCIJ slant?

You said:

Hindi na ito opinyon. You are imputing that the post in Daily PCIJ was a favor granted to one of its founders.

You amaze me with how you put malice into things you carelessly focus on, miss…

Care to point out where I actually ”imputed”that the post in Daily PCIJ was a favor granted to one of its founders.”?

Have I ever mentioned of any PCIJ post anywhere in my comment?

And what favor? Where in my post did I even mention or even refer to that?

You are putting words in my mouth.

Now as to founder

I did not use that word anywhere in my post. But to be fair, just in case you misconstrued my usage of “who started” (not who founded or founder), we’ll discuss your contention.

You went as far as saying:

If you can prove that Beting Laygo Dolor is one of the founders of PCIJ, I will eat your panties in public in front of a hundred witnesses. But if you cannot, you will french kiss my dog in public, in front of a hundred witnesses.

Put up or shut up.

Please refer to my post. Note that I just listed a rundown of the media and journalism outlets that that name is connected to. I researched on the personalities behind the “expose” and their connections to such media/journalism outlets came up.

PCIJ just happened to appear in the search along with the other establishments. It’s not the only voice front mentioned.

Why are you zooming in on PCIJ alone? Why would you go as far as inventing supposed accusations against it nowhere visible in my post?

Miss, here’s my post and I quote:

The Beting Laygo Dolor :

Of Philippine News Online:

http://philippinenews.com/article.php?id=5380

who started PCIJ (Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism ) alongside Sheila Coronel, Malou Mangahas, Lorna Kalaw-Tirol, Howie Severino and David Celdran.

http://preciousanne.blogspot.com/

Editor- of:

1. Bandera

2. Prime Asia and Pinoy Global Access

http://www.upjournalismclub.org/gallery/photos/suit-of-cards-a-forum-on-libel/

3. Playboy Philippines

http://www.bworldonline.com/Weekender072508/main.php?id=focus1

4. Business World

http://www.grabeh.com/forum/index.php

CONTRIBUTING EDITOR of:

http://www.filglobe.com/files/augpage22forum.pdf

Same Beting Laygo Dolor who released this:</p>

http://philippinenews.com/article.php?id=5380

Donated goods sitting in DSWD warehouse

Published, October 23, 2009

… after Ella released this:

http://www.ellaganda.com/?p=1759

Aanhin pa ang damo kung patay na ang kabayo? (A special report from a volunteer)

Published, Oct 21st, 2009

Same Beting Laygo Dolor who co-wrote the articles appearing here:

http://pinoybsn.blogspot.com/2006/10/arroyo-to-nurses-retake-board-test.html

http://bolanon.com/forums_topic_view.aspx?page=1&tid=3363&fid=2929&=desc

…with the girl whose name appears here:

http://services.inquirer.net/mobile/10/01/22/html_output/xmlhtml/20100121-248693-xml.html

…and whose identity is confirmed here:

http://forums.seo.ph/showthread.php?t=10191

You see? There are a lot of media outlets listed there but since you zoomed in on PCIJ alone , ok, let me ask you:

Can you point out where I stated “that Beting Laygo Dolor is one of the founders of PCIJ”?

Nowhere.

Nada.

Zero.

What I said was:

The Beting Laygo Dolor :

[…]

who started PCIJ (Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism ) alongside Sheila Coronel, Malou Mangahas, Lorna Kalaw-Tirol, Howie Severino and David Celdran.

http://preciousanne.blogspot.com/

Founder, the word you used, is defined by several dictionaries as:

Founder

n.

One who establishes something or formulates the basis for something: the founder of a university; the founders of a new nation.

http://www.answers.com/topic/founder

2: a person who founds or establishes some institution; “George Washington is the father of his country” [syn: founder, beginner, father]

http://www.dictionary.net/founding+father

Founded on the other hand, is defined as:

Founded

tr.v. found•ed, found•ing, founds

1. To establish or set up, especially with provision for continuing existence: The college was founded in 1872.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/start

Really specific.

I did not use any of those words. Did I?

What I used instead was: started.

Start, in its various definitions translates to:

–verb (used with object)

8. to set moving, going, or acting; to set in operation: to start an automobile; to start a fire.

9. to establish or found: to start a new business.

10. to begin work on: to start a book.

11. to enable or help (someone) set out on a journey, a career, or the like: The record started the young singer on the road to stardom.

12. to cause or choose to be an entrant in a game or contest: He started his ace pitcher in the crucial game.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/start

v.tr.

1. To commence; begin.

2. To set into motion, operation, or activity.

3. To introduce; originate.

4. Sports

a. To play in the initial lineup of (a game).

b. To put (a player) into the initial lineup of a game.

c. To enter (a participant) into a race or game.

5. To found; establish: start a business.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/start

You see then, start can mean a lot of things, a few of which would be applicable to what was described by the author of the blog whose link I have included along with the quote.

If you haven’t read the content of the link yet, here it is:

Screen Cap of Preciousanne.blogspot.com where PCIJ was mentioned

Little did I know that this simple thought which entered my mind as a teenager has actually been institutionalized through a research paper written by Honorable Rigoberto D. Tiglao (“Office of the Presidential Chief of Staff” Office of the Republic of the Philippines President Web Site. 26 August 2006 ) during his Nieman Fellowship at the Harvard University. The proposal on the establishment of a center to “address the need for newspapers and broadcast agencies to go beyond day-to-day reportage” (Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism Online. 26 August 2006

)gave birth to the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ)in 1989 together with his colleagues who are all well-respected Filipino journalists. They are Sheila Coronel, Beting Laygo-Dolor, Malou Mangahas, Lorna Kalaw-Tirol, Howie Severino and David Celdran.

And btw, you said:

If you can prove that Beting Laygo Dolor is one of the founders of PCIJ, I will eat your panties in public…

Panties?

Err…

Seems like jumping to conclusions has become arbitrary, huh?

You said:

Dahil hindi ako mahilig magdemanda, ganito na lang…

 

I’ve been reading other sites on this issue and I’ve noticed you seem to have a knack of saying these words to people who care to study this issue and whom you see as not agreeing with your views hook, line and sinker.

Miss, all the links stated herein are verifiable online and are out there for the public to see. Are you preventing me from pointing out that we all need to do some research before we cast aspersions on anyone? Or to be more apt, be responsible in how we present facts to the public and refrain from hurling stones at anyone?

People have minds of their own, they can think for themselves. I do not believe in imposing my opinions on them. The links indicated are but quotes from your own site and from sites scattered online which are relevant to the issue at hand.

Update

Looking at her site now, I noticed some lines have been revised so I am including the screen cap of the revised entry as well.

Bottom part, Screen Cap of Ellaganda's revised post at Ellaganda.com

Top Part, Screen Cap of Ellaganda's Revised post at Ellaganda.com

Additional Update:

Again, Ellaganda has updated the abovementioned post. Here’s her latest additon:
Additional Update, Ella's revised post at ellaganda.com

This is getting funnier by the minute.

I guess you really find it impossible to believe that other people can be concerned too. Not if they do not share your views.

I did a research on an important issue and I tried to share this with people who are as equally concerned, with the notion that informed interpretations are borne out of weighing matters with as much available details or facts as possible.

That being said, I’ll leave you to your assumptions and suspicions. It seems like when you’re dead set on something, not grace nor humility can veer you away from the track you want to take.

I’m already overwhelmed by the inanity. This is getting to be too off-tangent for me.

Written by issuesopinions

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:36:51 +0000 at 8:36 am