| Do you support the building of the casino? |
| Yes, I support the building of the casino notwithstanding the moral and social hazards it will bring to the people of Singapore and accept the consequences as stated in this post. |
|
57% |
[ 4 ] |
| No, I oppose the building of the casino notwithstanding the loss of the tens of thousands of jobs that would otherwise be created by having the casino in Singapore and accept the consequences as stated in this post. |
|
28% |
[ 2 ] |
| I neither support nor oppose the building of the casino. |
|
14% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 7 |
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:11 pm |
 |
|
| Eagle |
| Gold Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 25 Aug 2005 |
| Posts: 319 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| lpc1998 wrote: | | The problem is how to speak with a collective voice. |
My Mp refuse to bring up this subject.He's under whip' care. |
|
|
|
|
 | Re: OST Open Space Technology |  |
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:40 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alpha wrote: | | lpc1998 wrote: | | The problem is how to speak with a collective voice. |
Hi [lpc1998], have you heard of "Open Space Technology" (by Harrison Owen) that facilitates group decision-making, participatory development of ideas, solutions, and strategies for complex subjects that matter. I've also recommended the reading resources to FBU facilitators.
You may wish to check out this link:
http://www.openspace-online.com/ |
Nope, I have not. Are you familiar with it? It appears to be a commercial resource that is more suitable for established groups with financial means.
However, we shall keep it in mind when the time comes when we can make use of it.
In the meantime, what do you think of an improvised dedicated polling Category at FindSingapore? See more details in my reply to Eagle. |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:47 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eagle wrote: | | lpc1998 wrote: | | The problem is how to speak with a collective voice. |
My Mp refuse to bring up this subject.He's under whip' care. |
Thank you for speaking to your MP about it.
Unfortunately the idea is ahead of the MIW. So it means that we have to find our way here in order to be able to engage the government rationally and constructively.
If you and [alpha] are interested, maybe, we could explore with [patgoh] and the others who are responsible for FindSingapore the possibility of setting up an improvised dedicated polling Category like this: http://www.tdcommunity.org/index.php?c=13
after a poll showing there is reasonable support here for a such a project.
As they are responsible for FindSingapore, we have to concede to them veto powers on what issue or question could be polled here. This is both necessary and important. |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Great Timing for Our Gamblers? | |
| Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:51 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a re-post. The original dated 14 August 2006, Monday, has been lost in deep cyberspace.
===========================================
Mr Wang says: http://commentarysingapore.blogspot.com/2006/08/great-timing-for-our-gamblers.html
| Quote: |
Great Timing for Our Gamblers
Are we all set for the great casino game yet? About one year ago, I commented on the nation's new gambling plans and wrote this: | Quote: |
..... when the casinos arrive and the loan sharks get locked away, it may well be the banks which celebrate most exuberantly. Addicted Singaporeans will surely borrow. They can even borrow to pay the $100 casino entry fee. Remember - no questions asked. That's a basic characteristic of personal credit lines.
And with the serious competition - loan sharks - locked away in jail, it's the banks which will enjoy this exciting spin-off from our wonderful integrated resorts. |
Well, see what's happening now. Watch closely, as the MAS looks into dismantling Singapore's current rules on unsecured personal credit ... to allow everyone - the rich, the poor, the juvenile - to borrow more and more. All just in time for some fun & sun on Sentosa!
| Quote: |
Credit cards may fit in shallower pockets
(TODAY) Tuesday • August 8, 2006
Lee Ching Wern
IN A move that could bring easier unsecured credit to the Average Joe and potentially higher credit card limits for those earning more, the Government is now looking at tweaking the credit regime.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Ministry of Law have sought public feedback on a number of proposed changes.
Until now, you needed an annual income of at least $30,000 to obtain unsecured credit — such as a credit line or card — from a bank. This limit could be reduced to $20,000. The income requirement for credit cards, however, remains $30,000.
At the same time, a bank until now could allow you a limit of up to twice your monthly salary on both credit cards and other unsecured credit facilities — through ATM cards, for example. For those earning more than $30,000 a year, these limits will be merged into an aggregate of four times your monthly salary so that you can pick the form of credit you want.
For those with annual income of at least $20,000 and below $30,000, the maximum aggregate credit limit will be twice their monthly income. |
Oh, wait, wait. Now of course the government is not changing the rules so that more Singaporeans will gamble. Mr Wang was only referring to what Singaporeans can do, and what many of them would no doubt do, with the new sources of borrowing that the government is making available to them.
| Quote: |
An MAS/Ministry of Law statement said that the changes "do not signal a relaxation in the Government's policy stance towards unsecured credit".
Recent advances in risk management practices and the introduction of the credit bureau have made unsustainable debt for borrowers less likely. |
One thing that concerns me about these rules is that while they limit the amount that an individual can borrow from any one bank, nothing stops the individual from going to many different banks to get more credit cards and credit lines.
For example, suppose I earn $4,000 a month. Under the new rules (if they're passed), if I go to DBS, I can try to get aggregate unsecured borrowing limits of up to $16,000. Now if I then go to UOB, OCBC, Standard Chartered Bank, HSBC, Citibank, ABN AMRO and Maybank, theoretically I could get up to $16,000 x 8 = $128,000.
Wow, simply irresistible .... for gambling addicts. |
How reasonable do you think are Mr Wang's above concerns over the proposed changes to the credit card rules on the propsective Singaporean gamblers in the casino project?
Is it fair to link the proposed changes to the credit card rules to the casino project?
Related Posts:
Democracy in Social System – Collective Intelligence http://www.findsingapore.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2304
What is democracy as a political system? http://www.findsingapore.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1748
To whom the country belongs? http://www.findsingapore.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2041 |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Re: OST Open Space Technology | |
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:38 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
 |
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apologies [lpc1998] for the long overdue reply, apparently none of my replies from China went thru... "blocked" off by the filter that set in after an hour.
| lpc1998 wrote: |
Nope, I have not. Are you familiar with it? It appears to be a commercial resource that is more suitable for established groups with financial means. |
Firstly, let me correct the preferred OST resource website (lost among my archive) that I would let you and others to read... it shd be www.openingspace.net. I find the related OST information is more well-laid out here for sharing, hence my recommendation. Simple and useful. This preferred website will be a fruitful read.
(I agree the earlier substitute link I've given appears more commercial.)
A side-note, FBU has taken up my suggestion of OST and facilitators to them... a pleasant surprise although after years. They've sent me this email:
| FBU wrote: | Dear People's Forum member,
Open Space Technology Focus Group Discussion on Issues facing the Singaporean Workforce with Working Adults (25 to 55 years old)
Following the Prime Minister's National Day Rally 2006, the Human Resource Development Feedback Group would like to hold a facilitated open focus group discussion with working adults (aged 25 to 55 years old) to draw out the issues facing Singaporean workers today.
2. We would like to invite you to participate in this focus group discussion.
3. The objectives of holding such a session are as follows:
a. To solicit feedback on issues facing the mature workforce (aged 40 and above) today in the face of the employment opportunities to be created in the near future
b. To solicit feedback on what more can be done on life-long learning opportunities and retraining for continued employability
c. To solicit feedback on how to achieve a greater work-life balance as a means to increase birth-rate.
4. The details of the session are as follows:
Date: Saturday, 9 Sep 2006
Time: 9.30 am - 10.00 am (Registration)
10.00 am to 1.00 pm (Discussion)
Venue: The Grassroots' Club, 190 Ang Mo Kio Ave 8 , Singapore 568046
(Light refreshments will be served)
5. The discussion will be chaired by Mr Prabu K Naidu, the Chairperson of the Human Resource Development Feedback Group and be facilitated by the group members and professional facilitators from the Facilitators Network Singapore.
6. If you are keen to participate in this discussion, you can reply via the enclosed reply slip by Tuesday, 5 Sep 2006 to the Feedback Unit. As places are limited, an early reply would be appreciated.
Regards,
Ms Sharon Tan
Executive Office
Feedback Unit |
Although the heading "Open Space Technology Focus Group Discussion" sounds intimidating & out of place to unknowing ones... hehe somehow. |
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
 |
|
|
|
| OST - Opening Space for Collaboration, Facilitation Comm | |
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:49 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> Look up here to know more
Source: www.openingspace.net
| Quote: | Opening Space for Collaboration and Communication with Open Space Technology
by Lisa Heft
They don't all get along. The stakes are high. The issues are so complex it's hard to see a way through them, and the time for a solution was yesterday. As some individuals enter the room they note who is sitting with whom, and wonder why so-and-so was invited. Everyone can see that this isn't your ordinary conference, meeting or planning group. The room is empty of tables and all the chairs are arranged in one big circle. Well, this is interesting, anyway...
The facilitator welcomes the group, explains the theme and focus of their work together and invites them to think of what they want to hold discussions about. She gives a few guidelines for the discussion groups:
* Whoever comes is the right person - You don't need every person in the organization, just whoever cares the most. And if you're the only one who comes, you might finally have some rich, focused quiet time for thinking and writing on that issue.
* Whatever happens is the only thing that could have - Let go of your expectations and work with whatever unfolds.
* Whenever it starts is the right time - Creativity doesn't happen on a schedule.
* Whenever it's over, it's over. - If you find a solution in 20 minutes, move on to the next group. If it takes 2 hours, keep the conversation rolling.
One more thought: Be prepared to be surprised - Don't carry in your own agenda and by doing so miss some amazing thing that could come out of more creative minds working on the same issue...
There is only one rule: originally called the Law of Two Feet (I call it the Law of Motion and Responsibility -- we don't all have two feet, after all) -- if you are neither learning nor contributing in a session you are required to get up and leave and join another session in progress where you feel you'll be more useful and inspired.
The facilitator then invites participants to come to the center of the circle to announce what they would like to discuss and work on regarding this theme. Whatever they want to talk about - whatever has heart and meaning for them around this theme - and for which they are willing to convene a 75-minute discussion group.
At first, everyone looks at the facilitator, who is now sitting down silently in the circle. They look at the center of the circle, at the markers and paper there. They look back at the facilitator. They look at each other.
Then after a long moment someone walks into the center, writes down their topic, announces it to the group and posts it on a long empty wall. Then two more people. Then six. Then the center of the circle is full of people scribbling and holding up their topics and announcing them and posting them and the agenda wall fills up with 60, 80, 100 topics.
And so the day unfolds, as people pull their chairs together into groups of 2 or 20 and begin to talk and get more animated and trade ideas and learn from one another. Then it's time for them to move on to their next group, and their next group, and so on - to whatever topic inspires them.
Who facilitates the groups? The individuals in that group. What if someone is talking too much? Well you can be sure that anyone bothered by that will not choose to be around that person for their next discussion. They can always leave the group to go where they'll feel they can contribute. Notes are taken in each discussion -- what if you don't like the way someone took notes? Then you'll probably choose to be the note-taker in your next group. Each group consists of individuals with the capacity to self-organize. And so the groups cthroughout the day, each individual meeting his or her own needs.
Now people are chattering and scribbling on their notepads and others are walking around the room to grab a coffee or alight in a new group, and notes-takers enter the proceedings into a bank of computers then float back into another session. The day passes with everyone moving from issue to issue and idea to idea and the proceedings from each meeting are posted on the wall for everyone to read throughout the day. It looks like chaos - that is, if you are used to quiet meetings around conference tables. But if you look again, you see a teeming hub of activity, animated discussion, scribbling out of ideas and, even considering the urgency of the issue...laughter.
They continue talking over coffee. They continue over lunch. They are animated and passionate and people are communicating with each other in ways that break through the barriers they carried with them. Before they leave the group identifies actions and sets timelines and individuals offer themselves as point-persons for the work that must be done after this event. And a huge amount of work gets done in a very little amount of time. Two days covers more issues and solutions than six months worth of task forces or committees could ever do. As they gather in a closing circle for reflections, observation and insights on their time together, they don't say, "Boy, she was a great facilitator." They say, "Look what we accomplished together!"
Open Space originated because Harrison Owen designed and planned a conference, and when it took place he noticed that all the best work was done during the coffee breaks. All the networking, deal-making, visioning, and collaboration. All the new ideas and new products and new programs came from small circles of people chatting over similar passions and interests. Just as it happens in life. So for the next conference he designed a process that would be all coffee-break energy, all the time. Thus Open Space Technology was born
When should Open Space Technology not be used?
When the people who hold power and authority feel they must control the outcome and the way that people work together, then Open Space is not appropriate. A client using Open Space must commit to staying open to where the experience takes the organization, and as holding an Open Space may lead to innovation, the outcomes of the meeting are unknown until you get there. In Open Space people work together across hierarchal, historical and departmental lines, and indeed when everyone gets back to work it is probable that they will continue to work and communicate in a way that is different than the on-paper organizational structure or the ways a society has been set up, historically. Open Space shifts control from one leader to all of the participants themselves, including the organization's or community's traditional leaders.
Don't squish the space
It also doesn't work well if you squish the space into too little time. A half-day Open Space will work for quick brainstorming. A one-day Open Space allows for deep discussion and next steps -- I wouldn't design action planning into that short a time. Two days allows for deep exploration of the theme with some action plans and a full book of proceedings. A 2.5-day Open Space can include brainstorming, action planning, a book of proceedings and deeper buy-in from the participants.
Who uses Open Space Technology?
Since the mid-1980's Open Space has been used to hold international conferences, design new approaches to cancer research, rebuild communities after war, increase efficiency and revenue, design land use, create new products, discuss ethnicity and culture, develop strategic plans and bring perceived adversaries together. It has been used by Palestinians and Israelis coming together to talk about peace, New Yorkers trying to define their experience soon after the terrorist tragedy, Haitians building literacy programs, South Africans working together after apartheid, students, parents, managers, activists, engineers and architects.
Nobody owns the method, no certification process is necessary, and you can either learn it for yourself from reading a book or take a workshop to share your learning and experience with others.
I am part of a global learning community of Open Space practitioners who invite you to question, learn and share with us. We'll share our materials and experiences with you and help you design and prepare to lead your own Open Space event - and we'll want to hear your stories of challenges and successes, as well. Because we feel that when you open space for deeper communication and more passionate work, good things happen.
|
Special thanks to Open Space practitioners |
|
Last edited by alpha on Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
| Improvised Dedicated Polling Category at FS.net Forum | |
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:07 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| lpc1998 wrote: | | In the meantime, what do you think of an improvised dedicated polling Category at FindSingapore? See more details in my reply to Eagle. |
Dear [lpc1998], does this require literally every member to vote under that polling category to reap certain results showing neutral, support for or against certain moves?
Frankly speaking as you can see our polls here didn't gain overwhelming responses. Hence I think we may disappoint you.
We can think of ways to work around it... if we're keen to move along substantial build-up. Such as grouping this dedicated category up with its own voting right members to access. Sending notices for voting. Opening space for indepth expanded discussion, then go for polls. |
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OST Open Space Technology | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:06 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alpha wrote: | | Apologies [lpc1998] for the long overdue reply, apparently none of my replies from China went thru... "blocked" off by the filter that set in after an hour. |
It’s okie. No problem at all. Thank you for the attempted replies.
Yes, I have wondered what has happened to you. So all the while, you have been behind the Great Firewall of China. Since you are still so energetic with so much vitality, you must have an enjoyable and fruitful time in China.
It’s good we have got our engine for the discussions back. While you were away, the discussions here have ground to a halt.
| alpha wrote: | | Firstly, let me correct the preferred OST resource website (lost among my archive) that I would let you and others to read... it shd be www.openingspace.net. I find the related OST information is more well-laid out here for sharing, hence my recommendation. Simple and useful. This preferred website will be a fruitful read. |
Thanks for the link. It’s a very interesting read. There is a similar approach called Harmonization Dialog by Richard Moore, with more emphasis on the role of the facilitator : http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?id=917&lists=cj
Both these approaches requires face-to-face meeting, which is a problem for a cyber community.
| alpha wrote: | | A side-note, FBU has taken up my suggestion of OST and facilitators to them... a pleasant surprise although after years. They've sent me this email: … |
Congratulations! Your efforts are beginning to bear fruits. Perhaps, the wind is now blowing in the right direction after the recent regime change at the FBU.
It looks like you will be attending the proposed FBU’s OST Focus Group Discussion. If this is so, we may have an insider’s report on the results of the experiment. |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Re: Improvised Dedicated Polling Category at FS.net Forum | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:22 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alpha wrote: | | lpc1998 wrote: |
In the meantime, what do you think of an improvised dedicated polling Category at FindSingapore? See more details in my reply to Eagle. |
Dear [lpc1998], does this require literally every member to vote under that polling category to reap certain results showing neutral, support for or against certain moves? |
Nope, not every member of FindSingapore (FS). Only the votes of those who have agreed before hand to participate in the voting are counted. However, all persons including the guests to FS are welcome to the discussions.
| alpha wrote: | | Frankly speaking as you can see our polls here didn't gain overwhelming responses. Hence I think we may disappoint you. |
Nope, not me. It must have been disappointing to [Eagle] to know that so few even in FS are passionately against the casino project, unlike him.
| alpha wrote: | | We can think of ways to work around it... if we're keen to move along substantial build-up. Such as grouping this dedicated category up with its own voting right members to access. Sending notices for voting. Opening space for indepth expanded discussion, then go for polls. |
Yes, you have got it right here, except that I would advocate all and sundry are welcome to the cyber discussions whether as participants or observers. However, only those who have agreed before hand to participate in the voting have valid votes. |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| OST + Harmonization Dialog => ? Hybrid | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:46 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terrific share. Long draft but great write-up, I enjoy the read (minus the small font). Agree with:
| CJ wrote: | A collaborative meeting operates according to collaborative dynamics, and an adversarial meeting operates according to adversarial dynamics. Collaborative dynamics are about people gathering around an agreed objectives, identifying means to achieve them, and planning how to pursue that agenda. Within collaborative dynamics people have an incentive to listen to one another's suggestions, and in the planning process the group typically converges toward a consensus perspective on the task at hand.
Adversarial dynamics are about people debating from their fixed perspectives in an attempt to prevail over the other side. There is little incentive to listen to the other side, apart from looking for weaknesses that can be exploited. Each side may attempt to shift the perspective of the other side, but neither side has any intention of shifting its own
perspective. Whereas people learn useful things about their shared problems within collaborative dynamics, the only thing learned within adversarial dynamics is how to better combat the other side. Collaborative dynamics tend to avoid internal divisiveness when it arises, while adversarial dynamics tend to reinforce and encourage divisiveness among factions.
.... ....
For me this was a new kind of communication space, a three-dimensional space occupied by people rather than a one-dimensional space occupied by concepts and ideas. I refer to this as the "space of harmonization" because in such a space it becomes possible to harmonize the concerns and needs of the people who are participating. Once we accept everyone
as being an equally valid, caring human being, then each person's concerns become everyone's concerns. To ignore someone's concerns would be cast that person out in the cold, and you don't do that to a fellow human being. When this space of harmonization is entered, then the attention of the group naturally turns to the question, "How can we find solutions and answers that take all of our concerns into account?"
.... ....
If We the People are to respond effectively to our transformational imperative -- to save the world and humanity from this crisis -- we need first to actualize our common identity as We the People. We need to learn to see one another as human beings rather than as us and them. We need to learn how to harmonize our deep common interests instead of
accentuating our superficial differences. In order to respond to our transformational imperative, we must first respond to this harmonization imperative. |
| lpc1998 wrote: | | Both these approaches requires face-to-face meeting, which is a problem for a cyber community. |
How about some modification - we extract the merits or working principles of these two approaches and try out on the online platform - its promise of wide reach has the downside of being lost in action. Anyway the start won't be too big a group for worry. Uhm... later we can split cells and collaborate at interval rounds.
Let's get four elements in first:
- Openness
- Commitment
- Interest
- Participation
Try-out on remote teamwork: I've done similar open discussion structure within my cyber gamer group with satisfying results, ranging from one-to-one-chat, group dialogue to all-in-one forum discussion. The thing is the group is no more than 25 pax.
| Quote: | | It looks like you will be attending the proposed FBU’s OST Focus Group Discussion. If this is so, we may have an insider’s report on the results of the experiment. |
For once, I'm keen to. But too bad, I haven't recover from persistent cough. With throat soreness, I can't even talk for more than an hour; also contagious without a mask. |
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Improvised Dedicated Polling Category at FS.net Forum | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 10:21 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| lpc1998 wrote: | Nope, not every member of FindSingapore (FS). Only the votes of those who have agreed before hand to participate in the voting are counted. However, all persons including the guests to FS are welcome to the discussions.
Yes, you have got it right here, except that I would advocate all and sundry are welcome to the cyber discussions whether as participants or observers. However, only those who have agreed before hand to participate in the voting have valid votes. |
We can make it into a public forum category, meaning guests can post views/ thoughts alongside with FS members and valid voters. Where even overseas Singaporeans and well-wishers' views are welcomed.
| Quote: | | Nope, not me. It must have been disappointing to [Eagle] to know that so few even in FS are passionately against the casino project, unlike him. |
This polling category won't be used exclusively for ironing out the casino issue, right? Anyway govt has approved one licence, one more to go. Let me clarify... [Eagle] you're still keen to collaborate on this issue?
Any expectations?
Oh I forgot to ask you, any basic objective(s) you aim to fulfill under this concept - Improvised Dedicated Polling Category? |
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OST + Harmonization Dialog => ? Hybrid | |
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:25 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alpha wrote: | | lpc1998 wrote: | | Both these approaches requires face-to-face meeting, which is a problem for a cyber community. |
How about some modification - we extract the merits or working principles of these two approaches and try out on the online platform - its promise of wide reach has the downside of being lost in action. Anyway the start won't be too big a group for worry. Uhm... later we can split cells and collaborate at interval rounds. |
Good suggestion.
When the group has grown too big, it is a happy problem to be solved
| alpha wrote: | Let's get four elements in first:
- Openness
- Commitment
- Interest
- Participation |
‘Openness’ includes goodwill and good faith, willingness to listen and understand others’ points of view, uphold honest arguments and focusing on the issue and not the person presenting it.
‘Commitment’, ‘Interest’ and ‘Participation’ are encouraged, but they are not pre-requisites for participation in the discussion. Otherwise, they may become barriers to a wider participation.
Steps in a Cyber Deliberation
Step 1
Anybody may propose an issue or concern for discussion at a dedicated forum. (This forum is exclusively for proposal of issues only. No discussion is carried out here)
When not less than 3 voters or 1% of the total registered voters support the proposal, the proposer will then notify the moderator that his issue or concern is qualified for voters’ endorsement (qualified issue).
Step 2
On receipt on a notification of a qualified issue, the moderator will ask all the registered voters for endorsement of the issue. Only interested voters need to response.
Step 3
Any qualified issue that receives not less than 25% of the voters’ endorsement shall be eligible for voting. The moderator will then notify all the registered voters to vote on the issue. Voting at this stage is mandatory. Any qualified issue that receives not less than 50%+1 of the support of all the registered voters will be adopted for deliberation. A qualified issue that fails to receive the aforesaid support shall not be eligible for voting again under Step 3 for the next 3 months unless it has received not less than 51% of the voters’ endorsement under Step 2.
Step 4
A facilitator shall be elected or appointed for the deliberation of the issue or concern to ensure that the deliberation process is in order.
Step 5
The proposer shall then post his case for the qualified issue or concern at an appropriate forum and the rest of the participants shall examine it in details with clarifications by the proposer when it is needed. The proposer is allowed to amend his qualified issue or concern in light of the information, views and arguments put forwarded by the other participants.
Step 6
After the proposer’s case has been dealt with, the facilitator shall direct the participants’ attention to the other good or interesting points or sub-issues raised or put forward by the participants, one at a time.
Step 7
When the deliberation is completed, the issue or concern in its final version together with any proposed amendment will then be voted on. Whichever has the support of not less than 50%+1 of all the registered voters, it shall be adopted by the participants as a group view as distinct from the individual view. If 2 or more conflicting items receive not less than 50%+1 of the votes, then the one which has the highest percentage of votes shall prevail.
The basic ideas here are to ascertain issues for co-operative group discussions and to focus the minds of the participants point by point or issue by issue, thus making the discussion a structured one. In this way, the deliberation process would not be overwhelmed by the simultaneous discussions of many different points or issues all at once and that every important point or issue with the assistance of the facilitator would be given due consideration by the participants collectively.
The Role of the Discussion Facilitator
1 To ensure orderly discussions;
2 To guide and caution errant participants; and
3 To provide a summary or report of the discussion at various stages.
We shall begin with the simplest discussion structure when there is a minimum group of say, 12 voters, with the facilitator having the casting vote, and let it evolve as the group grows and matures.
What are your thoughts on the above suggestions?
| alpha wrote: | | Try-out on remote teamwork: I've done similar open discussion structure within my cyber gamer group with satisfying results, ranging from one-to-one-chat, group dialogue to all-in-one forum discussion. The thing is the group is no more than 25 pax. |
Good and useful experience
| alpha wrote: | | lpc1998 wrote: | | It looks like you will be attending the proposed FBU’s OST Focus Group Discussion. If this is so, we may have an insider’s report on the results of the experiment. |
For once, I'm keen to. But too bad, I haven't recover from persistent cough. With throat soreness, I can't even talk for more than an hour; also contagious without a mask. |
Unfortunately, bad timing. Have you seen a doctor for your cough? For temporary relief, I have found Woods’ Peppermint Lozenges (Extra strong) useful. [Available at NTUC FairPrice, Watson’s, Guardian Pharmacy, etc] |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Re: Improvised Dedicated Polling Category at FS.net Forum | |
| Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:32 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alpha wrote: | | This polling category won't be used exclusively for ironing out the casino issue, right? Anyway govt has approved one licence, one more to go. Let me clarify... [Eagle] you're still keen to collaborate on this issue? |
No, not meant exclusively for the casino issue. You are right. The casino issue has cooled down.
| alpha wrote: | Any expectations?
Oh I forgot to ask you, any basic objective(s) you aim to fulfill under this concept - Improvised Dedicated Polling Category? |
Yes, this category is to enable co-operative group deliberation of issues and the making of group decisions.
See my other post for more details. |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Poll-Proposals liken to Swiss "Initiative"? | |
| Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:14 am |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improvised Dedicated Polling Category
Objective: To enable co-operative group deliberation of issues and the making of group decisions.
| lpc1998 wrote: | Steps in a Cyber Deliberation
Step 1
Anybody may propose an issue or concern for discussion at a dedicated forum. (This forum is exclusively for proposal of issues only. No discussion is carried out here)
When not less than 3 voters or 1% of the total registered voters support the proposal, the proposer will then notify the moderator that his issue or concern is qualified for voters’ endorsement (qualified issue).
Step 2
On receipt on a notification of a qualified issue, the moderator will ask all the registered voters for endorsement of the issue. Only interested voters need to response.
Step 3
Any qualified issue that receives not less than 25% of the voters’ endorsement shall be eligible for voting. The moderator will then notify all the registered voters to vote on the issue. Voting at this stage is mandatory. Any qualified issue that receives not less than 50%+1 of the support of all the registered voters will be adopted for deliberation. A qualified issue that fails to receive the aforesaid support shall not be eligible for voting again under Step 3 for the next 3 months unless it has received not less than 51% of the voters’ endorsement under Step 2.
Step 4
A facilitator shall be elected or appointed for the deliberation of the issue or concern to ensure that the deliberation process is in order.
Step 5
The proposer shall then post his case for the qualified issue or concern at an appropriate forum and the rest of the participants shall examine it in details with clarifications by the proposer when it is needed. The proposer is allowed to amend his qualified issue or concern in light of the information, views and arguments put forwarded by the other participants.
Step 6
After the proposer’s case has been dealt with, the facilitator shall direct the participants’ attention to the other good or interesting points or sub-issues raised or put forward by the participants, one at a time.
Step 7
When the deliberation is completed, the issue or concern in its final version together with any proposed amendment will then be voted on. Whichever has the support of not less than 50%+1 of all the registered voters, it shall be adopted by the participants as a group view as distinct from the individual view. If 2 or more conflicting items receive not less than 50%+1 of the votes, then the one which has the highest percentage of votes shall prevail.
The basic ideas here are to ascertain issues for co-operative group discussions and to focus the minds of the participants point by point or issue by issue, thus making the discussion a structured one. In this way, the deliberation process would not be overwhelmed by the simultaneous discussions of many different points or issues all at once and that every important point or issue with the assistance of the facilitator would be given due consideration by the participants collectively.
The Role of the Discussion Facilitator
1 To ensure orderly discussions;
2 To guide and caution errant participants; and
3 To provide a summary or report of the discussion at various stages.
We shall begin with the simplest discussion structure when there is a minimum group of say, 12 voters, with the facilitator having the casting vote, and let it evolve as the group grows and matures.
What are your thoughts on the above suggestions? |
Wow [lpc1998], excellent procedural steps. It seems like your flow of thoughts come streaming in... lucid and well-structured. I'm impressed! We couldn't thank you enough for such deliberate initiative.
"When not less than 3 voters or 1% of the total registered voters support the proposal, the proposer will then notify the moderator that his issue or concern is qualified for voters’ endorsement (qualified issue)."
> I was thinking along this line of 1% too (rough estimate). (wink)
Just some points that I would like to clarify... those highlighted in blue...
An issue or concern can appear at any forum sections and be directed to
Dedicated Polling Section is for:
i) Proposal of issue for polling
ii) Qualification process
iv) Voting Polls - making of group decision
Back to appropriate forum section for:
iii) Deliberation Process/ Discussion of issue or concern - before going back to Dedicated Polling Section for voting
Action flow switching inter-section (from i-ii-iii-iv):
Wanted to let you know, presently all FS.net Sections do not allow guests to post (except for 'Chitchat Box' and 'Chatrooms'), hence our ideal to include "all and sundry are welcome to the cyber discussions whether as participants or observers" will be hindered by the present facts that guests can't. Like you, I prefer "The proposer post his case for the qualified issue or concern at an appropriate forum and the rest of the participants shall examine it in details with clarifications by the proposer when it is needed. The proposer is allowed to amend his qualified issue or concern in light of the information, views and arguments put forwarded by the other participants." That is becos activity base of some serious-going, regular members here tend to stick to 1-2 categories that appeal to them.
> So, we need to reconsider whether to open up the forum section "Singapore Issues" (if polling tend to resolve around local issues) for guests to post as well.
> Or, have the deliberation/ discussion held within the open Dedicated Polling Section, indexed and moved back to appropriate forum section after the poll is closed?
| alpha wrote: | | lpc1998 wrote: | | Yes, you have got it right here, except that I would advocate all and sundry are welcome to the cyber discussions whether as participants or observers. However, only those who have agreed before hand to participate in the voting have valid votes. |
We can make it into a public forum category, meaning guests can post views/ thoughts alongside with FS members and valid voters. Where even overseas Singaporeans and well-wishers' views are welcomed. |
[lpc1998], as you know, polls that we've seen came in all sorts and favours. I was wondering if we can have some examples of (qualifying) issues this Dedicated Polling Section is likely to handle. For example: local socio-economical-political issues that every Singaporeans have common interests in; or focus on complex or controversial issues that will benefit from such group deliberation?
Are we having a mini-virtual Council version of Referendum and Initiative present in Switzerland's government?
| Quote: | In some ways, the Swiss govt is one of the most democratic in the world. Swiss citizens enjoy close control over their laws through rights of the referendum and the initiative.
The referendum allows the people to demand a popular vote on laws passed by the legislature. A vote must be held if 50,000 people request it. The people can accept or veto the laws.
The initiative gives Swiss citizens the right to bring specific issues before the people for a vote. Such a vote may force a change in govt policy or may amend the Constitution. An initiative requires a petition by at least 100,000 citizens, All voters must be at least 18years old. |
A vivid example of polling proposal
This concept may still be alien to many members and guests, I was thinking if we can have a mock-up case to illustrate better, like using "To determine whether [Eagle] has a case on the casino issue", to run through clearly what's required of us, possible outcomes, and what it means to the participants. In short, the difference made by having this Improvised Dedicated Polling Category.
And thanks for the concern about my cough - getting better. |
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:39 am |
|
|
| patgoh |
| Moderator |
 |
| |
| Joined: 26 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 3602 |
| Location: Singapore |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear lpc1998 & alpha,
Thanks for the proposal.  I support the idea and we can try it out in this forum.
Can I have the honour to have both of you to handle this Category.
I would provide all the necessary administrative support.
patgoh |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:35 am |
|
|
| Grunt |
| The Juggernaut |
 |
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 2752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear concerns
Cyber Deliberation
Kindly define and eloborate as well as the objective it is trying to reach.
A conclusion course and clause or it is meant to be, never ending and
non conclusive then - what is the use of tying it to a poll ?
Determination of conclusion and result(s) and maybe a facilitator's epilogue.
(Who when and what)
| Quote: | Step 5
The proposer shall then post his case for the qualified issue or concern at an appropriate forum and the rest of the participants shall examine it in details with clarifications by the proposer when it is needed. The proposer is allowed to amend his qualified issue or concern in light of the information, views and arguments put forwarded by the other participants. |
Believe the proper and rightful passage to amend "information, views and arguments" is through the forum moderator - of which the moderator
would vet and deliberate the issue and amendment at hand to validate
and execute that amendment.
Else, one moment White then becomes Black.
Known, of people who switches side and orientations at a drop.
Worse, change their arguments or posts to suit the debate or
discussion to their advantage !
If they want to amend, then let them post their intention and reason
out loud and to the public instead in the quiet of the night with devil and
mice !
regards |
|
_________________
Let There Be Light ! |
|
|
|
| Re: Poll-Proposals liken to Swiss "Initiative"? | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:21 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alpha wrote: |
Wow [lpc1998], excellent procedural steps. It seems like your flow of thoughts come streaming in... lucid and well-structured. I'm impressed! Couldn't thank you enough for such deliberate initiative. |
Thank you for your compliment. To be honest with you, I have considered similar matters before.
| alpha wrote: | An issue or concern can appear at any forum sections and be directed to
Dedicated Polling Section is for:
i) Proposal of issue for polling
ii) Qualification process
iv) Voting Polls - making of group decision
Back to appropriate forum section for:
iii) Deliberation Process/ Discussion of issue or concern - before going back to Dedicated Polling Section for voting. |
Basically, you are right here. However, an issue or concern proposed for deliberation and eventual voting can be inspired by an on-going discussion at any FS forum section or anywhere including in the mainstream media or other parts of cyberspace. For quite some time to come, the proposer has to mobilize the support of 2 other voters before his issue or concern could move from Step 1 to Step 2 of the group deliberation process.
Once the issue or concern is accepted by the majority of the voters for deliberation, the issue will be posted by the proposer as a new thread at the appropriate forum (to comply with the structure of FS) so that the participants would not be distracted by any existing posts which do not follow the deliberation format.
| alpha wrote: | Action flow switching inter-section (from i-ii-iii-iv):
Wanted to let you know, presently all FS.net Sections do not allow guests to post, hence when our ideal is to include "all and sundry are welcome to the cyber discussions whether as participants or observers" will be hinder by the present facts guests can't. Like you, I prefer "The proposer post his case for the qualified issue or concern at an appropriate forum and the rest of the participants shall examine it in details with clarifications by the proposer when it is needed. The proposer is allowed to amend his qualified issue or concern in light of the information, views and arguments put forwarded by the other participants." That's becos activity base of some serious-going, regular members here stick to 1-2 categories that appeal to them.
> So, we need to reconsider whether to open up the forum section "Singapore Issues" (if polling tend to resolve around local issues) for guests to post as well.
> Or, have the deliberation/ discussion held within the open Dedicated Polling Section, indexed and moved back to appropriate forum section after the poll is closed? |
Since guests can be observers of the issue deliberation, they are welcome as such if they choose to be so. And guests who want to participate in the deliberation have to register as FS members. This is not a bad thing too, although we would like to have the guests as participants as well as what really matters most is the idea itself, not who proposes it, but the cyber reality is that there are too many spammers posting completely irrelevant and often objectionable stuff.
In view of the above and what you have said earlier on, Step 1 has to be amended to read:
Step 1
Any member of FS may propose an issue or concern for discussion at a dedicated forum. (This forum is exclusively for proposal of issues only. No discussion is carried out here)
…….
| alpha wrote: | | [lpc1998], as you know, polls that we've seen came in all different kinds and favours. I was wondering if we can have some examples of (qualifying) issues this Dedicated Polling Section is likely to handle. For example, local socio-economical-political issues which every Singaporeans have common interests in? |
Under Step 1, the qualifying condition for issue is the interest of the registered voters in the issue and not the contents or the nature of the issue:
| Quote: |
When not less than 3 voters or 1% of the total registered voters support the proposal, the proposer will then notify the moderator that his issue or concern is qualified for voters’ endorsement (qualified issue). |
So theoretically, any issue under the sun including “local socio-economic-political issues” could be qualified for discussion so long as not less 3 voters or 1% of the total registered voters are in favour of it. In practice, discretion is the better part of valour.
Examples of discussable local issues:
1 Has the government over-reacted to the ‘Brown Satire’?
2 Is the more liberal immigration policy for foreign talents good for Singaporeans?
3 The reasons why Singapore women are having lesser and lesser babies
4 The roles of the Singapore government.
5 Has Singapore a future?
Examples of best-to-avoid local issues:
1 The Lee Family or issues involving them
2 Has the PAP Government lost the moral authority to rule?
3 Is the PAP Government corrupt?
The reason why some local issues are best to avoid is because of the legal minefields surrounding them. Moreover, they are often neither compelling nor terribly useful. They are also too intractably embedded in party politics.
Furthermore, we must respect the veto rights over any discussion issue of the owners of the FS website and those who are responsible for it. Moreover, voters have the discretion of not supporting unnecessarily provocative issues, which generate more heat than light. Maybe at the later stage, we will have to look into the need to prevent our project from being hijacked by organized groups for their own purposes.
| alpha wrote: | Are we having a mini-Council cyberlife version of Referendum and Initiative present in Switzerland's government?
| Quote: |
In some ways, the Swiss govt is one of the most democratic in the world. Swiss citizens enjoy close control over their laws through rights of the referendum and the initiative.
The referendum allows the people to demand a popular vote on laws passed by the legislature. A vote must be held if 50,000 people request it. The people can accept or veto the laws.
The initiative gives Swiss citizens the right to bring specific issues before the people for a vote. Such a vote may force a change in govt policy or may amend the Constitution. An initiative requires a petition by at least 100,000 citizens, All voters must be at least 18years old. |
|
The Swiss Model of governance is regarded by many democracy reformists in the West (there are hardly any democracy reformist in the East) as the best example of practical true democracy primarily because of the Initiative and Referendum rights (more popularly known as the I&R) the Swiss citizens have enjoyed over a hundred years. Some American States have also managed to amend their Constitutions to have some forms of I&R, but in much watered down versions.
The Swiss democracy was established in the 19th century in 1848 with universal male suffrage. Women were only given the right to vote in 1971. So it carries lots of historical baggage with an extremely complicated relationship among the federal state, the cantons (the Swiss equivalent of provinces in other countries) and the people.
In Switzerland, national cohesion is achieved by involving the whole population in the decision-making process and by allowing citizens to participate in direct democracy. Many of those who live in Swiss democracy find there is no other choice, but stay and fight for it because there is no better democracy they could emigrate to..
( http://www.swissworld.org/dvd_rom/eng/direct_democracy_2004/content/politsystem/politsystem.html )
The Swiss Constitution is a very complicated one designed in the 19th century for the special circumstances of the Swiss people. So not many people would advocate a wholesale adoption of the Swiss Constitution for their own country and people.
The Swiss Constitution : http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/sz00000_.html
See Articles 138 to 142 regarding the much admired, but very complicated I&R provisions in the Swiss Constitution.
What we could hope to achieve eventually is a form of I&R for a cyber community that does not have the constraints of the Swiss history, culture, other traditions or geopolitics. Hopefully, such a community would eventually be able to draft and propose a truly People’s Constitution for Singaporeans, if not acceptable, then for any other people in the world who may find it useful.
| alpha wrote: | A vivid example of polling proposal
This concept may still be alien to many members and guests, I was thinking if we can have a mock-up case study, like using "To determine whether [Eagle] has a case on the casino issue", to run through clearly what's required of us, possible outcomes, and what it means to the participants. In short, the difference made by having this Improvised Dedicated Polling Category. |
An excellent suggestion! You are a teacher or what?
A Mock-up Case Study
Let us name this deliberation and polling proposal Category ‘Co-operative Cyber Deliberation’
Under this Category, let there be 4 forums:
1 Issue Proposals
2 Issue Endorsement
3 Issue Voting
4 Register of Voters
For the purpose of this mock-up case study, let us imagine there are 12 registered voters in the Register of Voters, and when we vote, each of our votes carries 2 other votes making a total of 3 votes each. You have also been elected the facilitator with a casting vote.
Now let you be the proposer of one of the discussable local issues in the examples above or you may propose any other such issue of your choice at an imaginary Issue Proposals Forum. In your proposal (in your next post here), do state as precisely as possible what you want the voters to deliberate and vote on together with a brief write-up on it that would encourage the voters to support your proposal.
See, two co-operative minds have begun to do some interesting things already. So more co-operative minds would be able to do much more interesting and important things.
| alpha wrote: | | And thanks for the concern about my cough - getting better. |
It is good to know that your cough is getting better. |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:42 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| patgoh wrote: | Dear lpc1998 & alpha,
Thanks for the proposal. I support the idea and we can try it out in this forum.
Can I have the honour to have both of you to handle this Category.
I would provide all the necessary administrative support.
patgoh |
Thank you, [patgoh], for your support and your proposal to let us handle the Category. I am delighted. I am sure [alpha] will be delighted too.
Looking forward to better and more interesting days ahead, |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:53 am |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Grunt wrote: | Dear concerns
Cyber Deliberation
Kindly define and eloborate as well as the objective it is trying to reach.
A conclusion course and clause or it is meant to be, never ending and
non conclusive then - what is the use of tying it to a poll ?
Determination of conclusion and result(s) and maybe a facilitator's epilogue.
(Who when and what)
| Quote: | Step 5
The proposer shall then post his case for the qualified issue or concern at an appropriate forum and the rest of the participants shall examine it in details with clarifications by the proposer when it is needed. The proposer is allowed to amend his qualified issue or concern in light of the information, views and arguments put forwarded by the other participants. |
Believe the proper and rightful passage to amend "information, views and arguments" is through the forum moderator - of which the moderator
would vet and deliberate the issue and amendment at hand to validate
and execute that amendment.
Else, one moment White then becomes Black.
Known, of people who switches side and orientations at a drop.
Worse, change their arguments or posts to suit the debate or
discussion to their advantage !
If they want to amend, then let them post their intention and reason
out loud and to the public instead in the quiet of the night with devil and
mice !
regards |
You are right about the amendments to the post to be transparent, open and public. The proposer would not be editing his original proposal. He has to submit his amendment(s) by new posting(s) |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Proposed Voters’ Code of Ethics | |
| Posted: Mon Dec 25, 2006 10:17 pm |
|
|
| lpc1998 |
| Silver Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preamble
The single most important factor for the success of democracy is the quality of the voters or rather the voters must be of a certain minimum quality failing which no democratic system can operate successfully.
So it is of paramount importance to have a Voters’ Code of Ethics. It is proposed as follows for the purpose of public deliberation:
Proposed Voters’ Code of Ethics
Voters should, when making decisions on national or public matters,
1 be honest, fair, diligent and courageous;
2 keep themselves informed of the main areas of the issues; and
3 not be corrupt voters. A corrupt voter is one who:
(a) votes dishonestly;
(b) trades the vote for personal or group benefits or interests at the expense of the people and country; or
(c) betrays the trust of his/her fellow citizens.
Related Posts
To whom the country belongs?
Democracy in Social System – Collective Intelligence
What is democracy as a political system? |
|
_________________
Best Regards
lpc1998 |
|
|
|
| Compulsive--Addiction | |
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:05 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What makes you compulsive to bet on?
| alpha wrote: | Don't assume low bets mean "less risks" as compared to high bets; the hidden danger is exactly that. And this usually caught people unaware during the addictive process becos one has less guard against low risks right from the start & entrench himself too deeply to call it quits by the time he realise it.
Addiction takes many forms too. |
Finally, some behavioural findings...
The Happiness Trip (Punset, 2007)
"The great happiness seems to be in the waiting room. It's a matter of expectation." Once you gets what you wanted, it's over. Happiness is maintenance cost. The happiness formula? (Factors that destroy happiness include fear, unnecessary conscious processes in decision-making, not accepting that happiness is ephemeral, idealization of objects and people, prejudices against oneself that distort reality, loss of control, and hormone fluxes.)
Do you know that your dog secretes dopamine neurotransmitter before eating, not while she eats, but in anticipation of her food?
The anticipation of pleasure is where the pleasure is.
Dopamine is about pleasure. It is the reward. The explanation is about the reward; it's the anticipation of the reward. We train a laboratory rat that when a light comes on in his cage, it means to go over and press the lever five times until he receives some food. The first time the rat gets the food, up goes his dopamine level. But after a while, when does the dopamine level rise? Not when the rat receives the food, but when the light comes on! In anticipation.
The rat sits there and says, "This is great! This is great! I know that light, I know where the lever is, and I can hit it. Look, this will be fabulous. I'm on top of it, I'm in control!" The pleasure is all about the anticipation. The dopamine rises with the anticipation.
Here is an even more interesting discovery from an extensive study a couple of years ago. The rat presses the lever and will get the reward. It is all worked out, except that now you, the investigator, respond differently. Instead, the rat gets the reward only 50 percent of the time.
You introduce uncertainty. And what you see, right after the lever is pressed, is a rise in dopamine, a huge rise, larger than ever before seen in brain chemistry studies. It stays up until the rat finds out if he will get the food or not. In other words, when you get just the right amount of "maybe", or uncertainty, it is even better than "here it comes definitely!"
OMG!
They show in these studies that the uncertainty of 50 percent creates the largest rise. With 25 percent, 75 percent, there is not as much of a rise in dopamine. "No, maybe it's not going to come! I'm not sure; yes, today I feel lucky!" It is anticipation. People who study the psychology of stress always emphasize that when we feel like we have no control, the feeling is very stressful. But here laws of maximal unpredictability feel great. What's the difference? Because we're optimistic in this benevolent setting. We say to ourselves, "This will probably work out OK. I will be fed or I will have sex. If not this time the next time..." and then maybe it is just the greatest thing you can imagine. And when this study was published many people commented on how much it teaches us about addiction and gambling.
It's a gamble: dopamine levels tied to uncertainty of rewards
Researchers have discovered that dopamine levels in our brains vary the most in situations where we are unsure if we are going to be rewarded, such as when we are gambling or playing the lottery.
Dopamine has long been known to play an important role in how we experience rewards from a variety of natural sources, including food and sex, as well as from drugs such as cocaine and heroin. |
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
| IMH's PAMS program | |
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:29 pm |
|
|
| alpha |
| Diamond Member |
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Apr 2005 |
| Posts: 1902 |
| Location: Utopia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Neptune @ FBU wrote: | The IMH has a program called PAMS (PSYCHOLOGICAL & ADDICTION MEDICINE SERVICES), which has been exclusively designed to meet the unique emotional and mental health needs of individuals recovering from Alcoholism & other Addictions such as Gambling. Adopting a HOLISTIC approach to care, PAMS has pioneered IMH's widening scope of services to include a broad spectrum of inter-related services and continuum of care. Since 1993, when first named the Alcohol Treatment Center, the Minnesota Model was already modified for use for local & foreign clients attending our programs. The Multidisciplinary Staff include Psychiatrists, Nurse Therapists, Psychologists, Social Workers, Occupational Therapists, Pharmacists and other Health Care Professionals. Gambling Addtion is listed under Addiction Services - Compulsive Gambling. The program includes:
1 PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING & THERAPY- Some patients require formal cognitive testing and personality assessments by our Psychologists. Cognitive Behavior Therapy & other forms of therapy for anger management, stress management, relaxation exercises etc are available.
2 FAMILY EDUCATION & COUNSELING - Our Medical Social Workers hold regular family education, counseling, and support meetings regularly. Involvement of significant others & family members is crucial for recovery of families as well as individuals so that meaningful relationships may be restored.
3 RECREATIONAL THERAPY - Our Occupational Therapists are available for various forms of recreational therapy which facilitate recovery from addictive habits & lifestyles
4 GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY - Group meetings are held to deal with addiction issues and recurrent themes which perpetuate relapses and strategies for relapse prevention are explored with group meetings which address feelings and thinking for permanent behavior change.
5 SUPPORT GROUP MEETINGS - On-site & Off-site Meetings help our patients identify with peer support and values, which promote self-reflection & life-style changes through modeling, role-playing and sharing of common struggles, strategies and successes. On top of these, patients are encouraged to continue attending Self-Help Groups like AA, NA etc for long-term sobriety.
Extended Care:
Some patients and families may consider Half-Way House Programs as part of further extended rehabilitation from the addictions, prior to return to full community living, which can be arranged. Outpatient Clinic Services are available at both IMH Clinic & Alexandra Behavior Medicine Clinic for outpatient reviews & follow-up.
To Contact IMH:
IMH Mainline (24 Hrs) (65) 6 389 2000
Clinic Appointments (65) 6 3892200 - IMH Clinic
(65) 6 474 4872 - Alexandra Behavior Medicine Clinic
Hotline (24 Hrs) (65) 6 389 2940/3
Fax (65) 6 489 0211
Fools gather where angels fear to tread. Know your weaknesses and handle your threats. Gambing addiction can be avoided either by oneself or with the help of loved ones. I have come across 2 types of problem gamblers; Action Gamblers and Escape Gambers.
ACTION GAMBLERS
Almost all are male generally started early as tennagers where the individual is very bright, testing high on IQ tests. Their outlets are games needing skill, incl black jack, poker, sports betting, and maybe also trading of stocks, commodities, futures, options, and bonds.
The gambling conveys a sense of euphoria, similar to a drug induced high. Generally, the action gambleer is very ego-driven, controlling, risk taking, narcissistic, sociable, and in need of approval, affirmation and confirmation.
But such individuals are observed to possess very low self-esteem and tend to bend the truth or lie. This category proceed through roughly 4 phases of Winning (Dollars) - Losing -Desperation - Hopelessness.
Their behavior could persist btw 10 - 30 years bf circumstances have reached a sufficient low for help to be sought. By that time the addiction has assumed far greater importance than family, friends, jobs, outside interests, and the individual is in serious jeopardy of losing absolutely everything.
Confronting such individuals about their problem behavior appears initially difficult because it is likely to excite denial, rationalization, or some brave words about manipulating the confronter into thinking the behavior will be modified. But there are typical signs of action gambling problems to look out for.
This 2nd form of gambling is far more prevalent in Singapore and includes many of the Auntie Types:
ESCAPE GAMBLERS
So the strange thing is that most escape gamblers (up to 75 %) are female. The problem initiates later in life, normally when 30 or older and exhibits codependent behavior. Escape gambling generally involves games requiring little or no skill like jackpot, slots, bingo, lottery, etc. Escape gamblers can appear numb, or in hypnotic trance when engaged in gambling. Escape gamblers feel free of emotional and physical pain when gambling.
Escape gamblers have typically been responsible and moral in their early lives, but tend to be conflict avoiders and have often suffered verbal and physical abuse. They have a desperate need for empowerment and gain thus they get it through their escape gambling. These individuals may possess low self-esteem, but can become manipulative as the problem develops.
There is a far higher probability of long-term cure through abstinence. Unlike the Action Gambler, these escape gamblers will pursue help with 6 months to three years of the problem’s inception.
Preconditions and Predispositions for Gambling Problems include the following observations commonly found among those suffering Escape gambling addiction:
Boredom, Stress, Grief, Loneliness, Chronic Pain, Empty Nest Syndrome, Abuse, Depression, Desperate Financial Condition, Lack of Hobby, Controlling/Domineering Spouse, Lack of Identity, Interrupted or Distraught Childhood, Dysfunctional Families.
In addition to these behavioral and emotional preconditions, the acceptability, and accessibility of gambling, including certain types of day trading, has added immeasurably to the gambling problem. Societal tolerance of gambling via lotteries etc and all forms of gambling only adds to the acceptability factor.
But sadder are the 4 Phases that Escape Gamblers go through before they run into a wall.
My notes on the Four Phases of Escape Gambling Addiction:
WINNING PHASE
Short or non-existent phase revealing several small or large wins, sense of emotional escape from problems, a boost in self-esteem and a sense of empowerment. Excitement, titillation and a social life at the casino fills a vacuum in the life of those predisposed by their conditions and considerable loneliness.
LOSING / CHASING PHASE
Losses are explained away as poor luck, no win is enough and gambling alone begins. Individual hides gambling, as losses puts person behind a financial "eighth ball". Addict begins to ignore family and becomes irritable when not gambling. Gambling becomes the sole, but spurious coping mechanism. Gambles to edge of insolvency and is unapproachable about the problem. This phase can last multiple years, with progressively larger bets on longer odds. Conversations only involve winners, not losers, which are purged from consciousness. Begins borrowing to support habit. Family life is going down in uncontrollable spiral.
THE DESPARATION PHASE
There is no time for anything else, and nothing else matters. Lying, manipulation, dissembling and complete deflection of criticism typify this period. Externalization of blame and complete lack or accountability are hallmarks of this phase. Acute anger at others who will not participate in the lie of his or her existence is typical. Financial affairs are disastrous. Bills are unpaid and family is knowledgeable, suffering and powerless. Phones go unanswered. The gambler wants it to end and contemplate suicide, which is a more frequent consequence than people imagine. Death is viewed as the only exit strategy. Rock bottom is generally the only point of possible remedial action. Only after the family forsakes the gambler, they have lost their job, they are being sued, and completely lacking in resources, does an attempt at remediation occur. Relapses from initial recovery programs are frequent, as he convinces himself and others that he has conquered his problem, but is merely recreating the downward spiral once again but with a transparent shield of lying and deceit. This relapse may trigger undertaking recovery in a more serious way. Unfortunately, there are many who undertake the recovery program at the same time they are still gambling.
THE HOPELESS PHASE
This is a new clinical phase which is a function of the fact that many gamblers actually go beyond the desperation phase. This phase goes well beyond what most people would feel was more than "bad enough". This phase can involve clinical depression, suicide, or actions that will most assuredly land them in jail. This is make or break time, quite literally.
I wish to share some details without prejudice pls. Its about the famous 12-Step Program which has actually a sort of spiritual/religious approach that is popularly employed to combat gambling addition as well as a variety of other addictive behaviors like drinking or drug-taking. The 12-Step Program is fundamentally based on ancient spiritual principles and rooted in sound medical therapy. The best recommendation for the program is the fact that people who were helped said "it works."
Here are the 12 steps used to combat gambling addiction:
1. Admit one is powerless over gambling - that one's life has become unmanageable.
2. Come to believe that a Power greater than oneself can restore one to a normal way of thinking and living.
3. Make a decision to turn one's will and one's life over to the care of this Power of one's understanding.
4. Make a searching and fearless moral and financial inventory of oneself.
5. Admit to oneself and to another human being the exact nature of one's wrongs.
6. Are entirely ready to have these defects of character removed.
7. Humbly ask God (or another significant icon / idol / person of one's own understanding) to remove one's shortcomings.
8. Made a list of all persons one has harmed through this and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Make direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10. Continue to take personal inventory and when one is wrong, to promptly admit it.
11. Seek through prayer and meditation to improve one's conscious contact with God (or other symbol) as one understands it, praying only for knowledge of its will for one and the power to carry that out.
12. Make an effort to practice these principles in all of one's affairs, one tries to carry this message to other compulsive gamblers. |
|
|
_________________
Insight comes from the realisation that observation is going on without an observer, witnessing without a witness.
|
|
|
|
Find Singapore.Net Forum Index » International Issues
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Page 3 of 3
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
