Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Avoid defamation

Friday, October 16, 2009

Avoid defamation

I like to ask commenters to avoid statements that can be considered to be defamatory. Please avoid using specific names against commercial or government entities.

Be positive in your postings. Identify what is right, rather than focus on what is wrong. Avoid putting any person or organisation in a bad light.

7 comments:

Wealth Journey said...: "To qualify to invest in investments of the rich, you need to have at the least the nett worth of $1million. Find out how you can invest with the rich even if you do not have it in this event."

Look out for this phrase in How to Get Rich Courses.

Out of boredom, I attend these seminars and I can tell you the modus operandi and I am still amazed that there are so many s*ckers out there.
1) Build Logos (credibility by reasonable logic) by telling audience how much you made and try to show evidence by flashing some cheque/invoice/dubious share certificate of value beyond reach of most audience(possible around $300k to a million).
2) Build Pathos (emotional) by recahing out to audience the fruits of being rich and how you can become one of them by learning what the trainers have to offer.
3) Build Ethos (ethical) by telling audience why they want to impart the get RICH skill to the audience, not because of money but because of ..you filled in the blanks.; October 17, 2009 3:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan,

I visit your blog daily and think you do a wonderful job in educating the public about financial matters.

As you have a large following, please allow me to point out a common error in your postings:

"I like" in this post should actually be "I would like" or "I'd like". "I like" = antonym of I dislike while "I'd like" = I wish.

Thank you.; October 17, 2009 8:52 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Hi 8:52 AM

I avoid the use of the word "would" and "should". I think that, without these words, the meaning is still clear.; October 17, 2009 10:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan I understand why you want people to try and be balanced in their views but should we all really try to be positive about certain investment schemes that clearly have no possibility for the investor and are purely designed to benefit those who run them ?

UK Land Banking plot investments have a zero success rate in 7 years with many people losing all of their investment when the companies fail. It is hard therefore to see how any investment advisor or newspaper can write positively about them and yet many do. On that basis isnt some negative comment essential to provide balance ?; October 17, 2009 6:11 PM
Anonymous said...: I think it's still alrite with or w/o would/should. no issue for me.; October 17, 2009 6:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan and Anonymous @6.26pm,

I'm not trying to nitpick, but the meaning of "I like" (opposite meaning of "I dislike") and "I would like" (polite way of saying "I wish") is quite different. Yes, people still understand the general meaning of the sentence, but I'm afraid this grammatical error may become more widespread... This is just a constructive feedback with absolutely no intention to undermine the good work that Mr Tan is doing here.; October 17, 2009 7:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan,

Nobody wants to put others in a negative light. Nobody wants to be the unpleasant person and point their fingers.

I would not use names. Its just that the banks, insurance companies, real estate agents have mis-selled, trick us so many times into buying their products or services.

Can anyone really say that they have not been sold a bad product or services before?

I am not pro-govt. But I think the govt is doing a good job. They are not regulating these industries bec it provides jobs.

Its only when things got out of hand that they are regulating the property agents.; October 21, 2009 10:16 AM