Former State Secretary Yusril now blogs?


Yusril Ihza Mahendra, the State Secretary who was dismissed from office by President SBY for his part in helping Tommy Suharto recoup his ill gotten gains from overseas, has apparently started to blog.

His blog has only one entryΒ  so far, entitled Foreward. Doesn’t say much but for the story behind how the disgraced Cabinet member and leader of the Partai Bintang Bulan started blogging read Priyadi here.

For more information about Yusril, the putative champion of Islamic values, read Indonesia Matter here.

53 thoughts on “Former State Secretary Yusril now blogs?

Add yours

  1. Its seems you got information for the reason why Yudhoyono dismissed Yusril from cabinet from Indonesian Matters. The reasons they concluded, I think, too simply, without deep analysis. Indonesian Matters sometime published a news attacked Yusril with wrong translation for what Yusril said. About his wife, for example, Yusril siad “saya ingin mengajari isteri saya tentang agama Islam” as quote by Indonesian media (I want to teach my wife about religion of Islam). But Indonesian matter said “Yusril Instructing his wife in Islam”. After that a lot of irrelevant comment addressed to him. Its realy injustice.

    Like

  2. No it doesn’t. the tone is a different, instructing could be interpreted as commanding or ordering (there is a ”force attitude” in there) to follow Islam, while teaching (which I am pretty sure what Yusril means in here) is to enlighten, to give explanation about Islam. There is no force attitude in the context.

    I am no big fan of him, but in this case, i agree with zukhalai, I found that foreign media sometimes tend to misinterpret in order to sell news.

    Like

  3. instructing english, teaching english…
    english instructor, english teacher…

    Us Indonesians are so sensitive about ‘tonal language’, eh ?

    Like

  4. Come to think of it, i realize i would change the tone, the subject, the choice of verbs, even the accent, if i met someone older or i barely knew. It is something that is already built in me, somehow. As an example, in Makassar, instead of using Ko/Kau/Kamu, we used ”kita’ to refer to second person which is older or we just met to show respect. This may be misintepret as in Indonesian it refers to ”both of us” or ”you and me.”

    And i did check it in Oxford πŸ™‚ the first formal definition of ”instruct” is to tell somebody to do something. That might be the tone that Zukhalai protested….

    Like

  5. I think Indonesia Matters is not foreign media, if I see it form my position as Indonesian citizen. Its Indonesian Media publised in English and managed by Patung, Achmad and others. All of them seems Indonesian. I am a journalist and attended the opening ceremony of Senayan City, when some journalists met Yusril and his new wife, a few days after they married. The time was near to Ramadhan month. A journalist asked him about his plan for “honey moon”. Yusril said “We dont plan for honey moon”. Ramadhan month just near. It is a good time for me to teach my wife about religion of Islam. She just embraced Islam. She wants to know more about this religion… She wants to know about fasting and other Islamic practices.. After Ramadhan, we plan to go to Mecca for umrah”. Its religous activity, not honey moon actually”.

    Indonesia Matter published an article entitle “Yusril Instructing his wife in Islam”. I think the Patung’s translation was incorrect, so why a lot of irrelevant comments presented to Yusril as I mentioned before. Yusril and his wife not only became misunderstood persons, but also be the target for attacks. As human being, I think, of course they get affected. The comments and attacks not only found in Indonesia Matter, but also in other media. They quoted article in Indonesia Matters.

    I think, this is the problem of ethics and human rights that we have to consider seriously…

    Like

  6. @zukhalai: Interesting. I think to most English users “teaching” an “instructing” means the same thing and instructing does not have any negative connotations. What would be their equivalents in Indonesian? Perhaps something’s lost in translation here.

    Like

  7. No. I agree with Winterinoz. People tends to understood the word of “instructing” like a command. Other people must do something either he/she understand or not, like or don’t like”. When you read comments and attacks persentend to Yusril, you will find they felt Yusril like a commander intructs somethings to his wife, and she must obey it. Other commentators connect it with religious freedom. They said Yusril intollerance, etc. After use word “instructing” Patung said his wife converted to Islam “in order” to marry Yusril. Its Patung interpretation, not what Yusril said.

    “Instruction, instructing and instructor means far away different when used as an adjective or pronoun comparing in the usage as a verb which could be positive or negative. For example when you used the word instructing between the commander and the soldier is normal, but the husband instructing his wife has a negative conotation.

    The world “mengajari” in Malay and Indonesian means to “teach” because he/she wants or asking it. “Tuan Guru mengajai kanak-kanak membaca Al-Qur’an”. It mean the Tuan guru teach the children reading the Koran. The parents usually send their children to a pondok or madrasah or small mosque to learn reading the Koran.

    The word “instruct” in Malay ia “memberi amaran”. In Indonesian “memberi perintah”. I think in Malaysia, never a Malay will say “memberi amaran” to his wife. In Indonesia too. Its impossible for us to say “memerintahkan kepada istri”.

    Anyway Pak Ong, the main issue I asked to discuss serously is the ethical and human rights problem rised by the article in Indonesia Matters to Yusril and his wife. What is your opinion?

    Like

  8. @zukhalai: Ah. There we have it. My understanding of “instruct” is to teach, whereas the Indonesian equivalent is to “warn off” or “to order.” DEfinitely something lost in translation. Thanks for enlightening me on the Indonesian meaning.

    On Yusril and his wife: What human rights problem raised by Indonesia Matters? The writer was a bit smug but I don’t think he’s implying that there is any human rights violations. As far as Unspun is concerned they are both adults and if he wants to teach her Islam and she’s willing to convert and learn, its their business.

    At 22, however, she does seem rather young for Yusril and you wonder how much equality there could be in the relationship. Still, different strokes for different folks. So long as they keep within the bounds of good taste Unspun wishes them happiness. πŸ™‚

    Like

  9. Pak Ong, I am not aksing only the matter human right problem, but also ethical problem. Yusril and his wife are real persons. Yusril is an Indonesian citizen. Of course he has the rigths as guaranteed by Indonesian constitution, like other citizens. Meanwhile Patung maybe not real. I never heard Patung used as a human name in Indonesia. Maybe I am wrong. Everybody can say something bad to Patung, but he will not get affected, because he/she is not real. Some one not real but can caused real person be affected. I think its a matter of ethical problem.

    Like

  10. @Ndoro Kakung: Thanks ya πŸ™‚

    @Zukhalai: Oh that. Yes, I agree with you. I think we should all take responsibility for what we write or say and bloggers should blog under their real names. This is so especially in a country like Indonesia where there is freedom of expression. I can understand people blogging anonymously in Malaysia or Singapore, but in Indonesia? Ridiculous.

    I also find that most of the expatriate bloggers blog anonymously. The reason they give is that the things they say may be so sensitive that it could get them in trouble with the authorities. This is just a convenient excuse. I believe the Indonesian term for such attitudes is “ngarep”?

    Like

  11. Thank you Pak Ong. I just wish Patung and others will read your opinion. From ethical point of view, everybody must take responsibility for what they say and for what they do, especially if they attack someone, and got affected..

    Like

  12. I absolutely agree with Zukhalai. No matter what is the real argument, anonymously means hiding beside the fact. We cannot say that, “This is my blog and I can write everything I want. If you disagree with what I talked about, just write the opposite post in your blog”.

    This is true, but anonymous still anonymous. We cannot just say, “You’re a popular person and I’m just nobody” or something like that.

    Like

  13. you guys make me laugh! Why should we use our real names on the internet? You know how many crazy stalker types there are out there? What are you all newbies? And indonesia has freedom of expression? Think again! You can’t even decide what religion you want to practice here unless it’s on the government list!
    If you guys are only offended by using the word instruct instead of teach, then you haven’t really got that much to worry about then have you? For native english speakers it’s the same thing.
    Plus not just the foreign press gives biased reports, so does the indonesian news including metro. They are biased in reporting all matters pertaining to islam, palestine and israel…. everyone has a position, though in true professional journalisim you are supposed to be neutral. You just don’t notice it if the position is one that you yourself endorse!

    Like

  14. @Vavai: I think you’re referring to my post in Indonesia Matter, right? About me justifying each one of us being anonymous in this virtual world?

    Like I said in IM, does that make any difference to you or to all the readers, if I had used my real name? If yes, please let me know what is the difference, maybe there’s something I’ve missed to consider.

    And lastly, after you said all that, I’m still not sure whether Vavai is your real name or just a nickname…..

    Like

  15. @janma: All the crazies out there make it all the more more important that we use our real identities to log and be on the net. Its about honesty, its about having pride of who you are and its about taking responsibility for what you write.

    I agree with you about the meaning of the word instruct but I don’t agree with how you make your point. The argument about foreign and Indonesian media is a diversion: two wrongs do not make a right.

    Like

  16. @Janma. Try to do contemplation… Imagine your self a real person, let say you are governor of Jakarta. Some one anonymous attacks you and “caci maki” openly and say what he/she wants to say. Will you get affected? Ask you heart.. Ask you consience..

    Like

  17. two tu-quoque-like in a row πŸ™‚

    @unspun: i know this is OT, but would you mind making article to explain more about your “straight and crooked thinking” article? probly with examples, my english reading comprehension level requires alot of examples πŸ™‚

    it will be convenient if you put anchor tag on each point so we can specifically point to any of them anytime using links.

    @janma: words evolve. their connotations change through times and through places.

    i think i can guess the culprit, the word Instruction in indonesia was used by former president Soeharto as tool for authority, he often edict the most powerful “instruksi presiden / inpres”
    and before we know, it become a symbol of dictatorship, albeit unawarely.

    having said that, it doesnt mean i agree with overreaction over that word.

    Like

  18. unspun, I am so glad I didn’t use my original identity on indonesia matters or pak yusril would have had me arrested by now! Why should I take that risk just to express my opinion.
    About ‘maki maki’ on the web…. happens all the time, people call you all kinds of names. that’s just the way it is and if Pak Yusril wants to become president he better get a bit of a thicker skin cause in the real world people maki maki the president and the government all the time. That’s the risk you take being a public figure.

    Like

  19. oh, yes and bonar, I understand now about the word instruksi and it’s connotations in Indonesia. That’s not how we would see it at all, but thanks for pointing it out. I still think that if that was the only ‘maki maki’ that pak yusril had to worry about then he has gotten off lightly. And I think that it’s a diversion from answering the real questions he was asked.

    Like

  20. @zombie: you have a very good point there. anonymous comment usually carry little weight and little impact, that’s true. but considering how small we are (some of us are students, while others are just housewives, low-rank workers, professionals, etc), we don’t expect our comment to have such an impact as well.

    for example, you are a minister, and this guy nicknamed Arema criticized you / suggesting something to you. Does that make any difference if I put my real name, let’s say Ari Mahardika (a nobody, probably just a farmer or tukang becak who happens to be literate in english), and posted the exact same message?

    imho, it will make a difference only if the object of your post know you, or you have sufficiently high credibility (like professor or specialized analyst) to post such comments.

    lastly, although I agree with Pak Ong that we’re responsible for each one of our post (because we’re indirectly representing our religion, our ethnic group, our family, our nation, etc), we can’t neglect our own safety (and privacy?) as well.

    Like

  21. @Janma and @Arema. I just thinking from morality point of view, either in the real world or in the internet. Of course, I agree everybody have right to present their opinion or ciritic to someone, either they use their real names or anonymous. I just hope, still we respect them as human beings, if they are real persons, event they are just ordinary people. So better we are not “maki-maki” attack them personally, or presenting somtehing that actually no more than a slandering or “fitnah belaka”.

    Let’s say Ubi is real women. We “maki-maki” her with abusive language and than slandering her: she is bad women, she has affair with other man, event she already has husband and children. I think, Ubi will feel unconfinient with the attacks. She will feel more hurt, if her husband, children, neighbours or relatives ask her about something they read in the internet. Ubi felt she did not anythings as posted in internet.

    So, who will responsible for something happen to Ubi? She is a human being, same like us, right?

    Like

  22. hei zombie, relax ….

    have you read what Janma and Arema comment on Yusril in Indonesian Matters? I do not see them ‘maki maki’ pak Yusril … and for Dragonwall v pak Yusril, both of them ‘maki maki ‘ each other … hehehe πŸ™‚

    and um, can you start by reveal your real name instead of pointing someone else to do that ? i don’t think your real name is zombie anyway…

    btw, i am using my real name and real email address … but i don’t think anyone interested haha

    peace for all!

    Like

  23. @bonar: will elaborate on dishonest tricks of argument when I have time.

    @Arema: It doesn’t matter much on the net whether you are Orang Besar or Wong Cilik as everyone has equal say in the virtual world. So for someone like Yusril to take to the blogs he is (from one perspective) lowering himself to everyone’s level or (another perspective) egalitarian that he is saying to everyone that they have the same say as he has.

    All the more important that we disclose our identities if we want credibility. I may not agree with everything Yusril says but right now he has more credibility to me than Dragonwall in Indonesia Matter’s thread about Yusril. If nothing else at least Yusril has the guts to stand up in his own name. Dragonwall, however, hides behind a cloak of anonymity and can be as irresponsible as he wants to (not that I am saying he is) without any consequences to his reputation.

    Like

  24. I would have to disagree with your statement that the need to blog anonymously may be true in Malaysia and singapore but ridiculous here in Indonesia. This is the same country where a supreme court justice was murdered and the the murderer did very little hard time. The same murderer who was was assisted by the justice department in recovering 10 million dollars while Pak Yusril was minister. Do you really want to be caught out criticizing publicly people with these kinds of connections?

    Perhaps you did not read Pak Yusrils backhanded threat to blacklist certain people from entering Indonesia. Why should the IM readers stick their necks out if this is what they can expect?

    Here’s an experiment for you Pak Ong. Why not in future forms list the addresses of all the people who write in. See if the number of comments drops…I bet you they will. People comment anonymously because they have have a sincere wish to protect their privacy.

    On the other hand people in the public eye have put themselves there. If Pak Yusril does not like his actions in the public eye then he should avoid even the appearance of murky dealings. Once he is in public office he is fair game so to speak.

    I would rather have my arguments pasted as not credible then run the risk of people arriving at my house in the midde of the night or not having my visa renewed or my business license revoked.

    If the comments are valid and make people think twice what difference does it make if they are anonmymous or not.

    Cheers

    Like

  25. pj_bali: The risks of being supreme court judge, especially one with balls, is not commensurate with those of a blogger. Your argument is valid though as there have been bloggers who have received threats for their blogging. (such as the blogger who was threatened by an Ulama, as related in Ndoro kakung).

    Even so the risks that bloggers are faced with pale by comparison to countries such as Malaysia and Singapore where multi-million dollar lawsuits and political persecution can be brought to bear on them.

    My point is that if you blog then you need to be a responsible blogger. Part of being a responsible blogger is to be transparent (hence the phrase naked Conversations). You can’t even begin to be transparent unless you declare who you are. People will then be able to decide what your motivations are and whether you might a hidden agenda.

    This is important in a medium as unregulated as blogging where “sock puppets” are being used for political and character assassination more often than not. I am reading a book called “The Cult of the Amateur” by Robert keen where the author rails against the babble of anarchic voices. I don’t agree with much of what he says but he has a point about all that shit out there and how does one even begin to try to figure out who’s genuine or who’s not?

    Like

  26. @pj_bali:
    “If the comments are valid and make people think twice what difference does it make if they are anonmymous or not.”

    It will reduce the credibility of the comments, however valid they are, to mere rantings.
    It is a pity that, perfectly constructed valid arguments will just go by, becoz people doubt the credibility of the commenters,
    i mean, really! if one would not admit who they are, how can you be sure they will admit honest mistakes that might be made throughout a discussion? before long it will become a flaming war.

    One can always say to an anonymous, “ah you are just a sour grape who’s trying to incite public schadenfreude”, even though they made a good argument.

    On the other hand, if the anonymous prevail on making mass schadenfreude, then who will be held responsible for character persecution they make?

    ironically, it makes a whole lot of differences when an “invalid” comment are made by a yusril.

    Like

  27. @pretty, I did not take any spesific referrence to Yusril’s case in Indonesia Matters. I just talk something from moral point of view. It means I talk something general, about human being…

    Like

  28. Unspun
    Last kick at the cat and then I will shut up. Despite your good points I would still hold to my contention that you would have a much smaller contributing audience if you requested all of your contributors to declare themselves. I don’t know of any bloggers that demand this of their readers and I’m pretty certain that the blogosphere would be much smaller and poorer if this were the case. Try it and find out.
    Bonar
    Certainly one can always say “ah your just a sour grape…(great word shadenfreude btw – how often can you use that in conversation) argument but then one is attacking the player and not his words. Good words will always stand on their own as long as you can back your points with facts.

    Of course it makes a whole lot difference when a public figure makes an invalid comment. Cabinet ministers, presidents, prime ministers and kings are held to a much higher standard of public accountability than the rest of us. They are the leaders of the state and leaders should lead by example. Pak Yusril is a canny enough politician to know that even the appearance of inappropriate acts sets a bad example to everyone else.

    Like

  29. @pj_bali:
    ah schadenfreude,

    i firstly encountered the word on boston legal, a character asked,
    why a famous somebody who have done socially unaceptable deeds got persecuted on other unrelated crimes? The only reason is schadenfreude.

    “..argument but then one is attacking the player and not his words”
    thats exactly my point:
    without having some sense of credibility on the person, even a good argument of the anonymous part will easily be dismissed as a petty rant, by others.

    But sometimes anonymous crook come, and some of their words slips to public consciousness, and before long it become “acceptable fact”, and we may have a condition where good words and good facts are overwhelmed by crooks, while both sides are anonymous.

    My point is, thats not healthy for meaningful discussions.

    “Good words will always stand on their own as long as you can back your points with facts”
    Oh i hope it will always be like that.

    however, what dragonwall say werent all good words,
    even from the beginning it was full of fallacies, though some of them are not.
    But many parts were full of causative accusations where it might actually be correlative, or he assumed bad intention, where it could be an honest mistake of yusril’s part.
    It was only natural what yusril’s asked from him, an identity.

    Then hell broke loose with full joy when he demanded that, and suddenly dragonwall looked like a champion of truth, and everyone who defended yusril are mere sidekicks…
    that… my friend, is schadenfreude. The joy of hatred comes not becoz of his answers or his demands, but just becoz it was yusril whos asking that.

    The point is simple actually, if you want to insult somebody with harsh words, or wanted to give him rope to hang himself, come out bravely, meet the person when he asked for it. dont stay in the closet πŸ™‚

    now i, miself, dont agree with many of yusril’s views, especially about islamic laws, naturally, as i am a christian. but that will be a whole other bunch of words about the nationbuilding.

    and my position about his views will not prevent me to agree with him on this anonymous matter.

    Like

  30. @pj-Bali: Oh I agree that requiring readers to disclose full names and addresses will reduce the number of readers. Some blogs already do this by requiring readers to register themselves before they post a comment.

    I think it is also important to distinguish between bloggers – those who keep plogs and the readers who drop by to comment. The onus for disclosure is lighter on the readers. Nonetheless, I hold forth that the Blogosphere would be a much richer and more civilized place if people were to disclose their identities. Might have fewer denizens though as you contend.

    And yes, schadenfreude, is such a great word, isn’t it. Interesting examination of this concept in Ed Denzinger’s book, Nail ‘Em about crisis management. There’s a posting about the book somewhere in this blog.

    Like

  31. Unspun said:

    “I hold forth that the Blogosphere would be a much richer and more civilized place if people were to disclose their identities”

    Unspun, me think, everybody have their rite to stay in the closet for the privacy and everything. I will take example on kamarul, all of us commenting on him, not even know whether kamarul is his real name; who is winterinoz ? vic ? bonar ? we do not know their real name or who they are, but we respect their standpoint and comments, replying them etc, its worth something rite? do we ever said they were only ranting or sour in the grape because they did not put their complete real names ?

    I think, ethics and respecting each other is more important than demanding the real name. I mean, well, good for those who do that, but for those who does not or did not want to ? they have every right in this world to do so! and we, we also have every right in this world to criticize them, ban them, delete their reply, gathering sidekick to defend us, or find out who they are, google them πŸ™‚

    do your best and let akismet do the rest! πŸ™‚

    Like

  32. @pretty, I cannot relax because I am zombie, he he… Anyway I agree with you, their critics and their comments are more important than their actual names. I just regret, they use anonymous to present personal attacks to someone. They use abusive languange, create a rumours and then slandering a real person. Take Yusril and his wife for example. Please read all posts about them after an article published in Indonesia Matter, Indcoup and others.

    @arema, I am not so sure, the abusive comments pesented by anonymous just “carry little weight and little impact” to the real persons. In fact in the past election, activists from a political party printed out the abusive comments and personal attacks they found in internet as a matter to attack their political rivals. Ordinary peoples, especially the villagers, who are not familiar with blog, can easily believe with that kind of propaganda. The person who attacked must spend much time to exlpain to the the public, what the truth…He got affected. This is realy the problem of ethics as I mentioned in my previous post..

    Like

  33. zombie, I agree your comment to arema. Event it just “carry little weight and little impact”, still we cannot do it, if we see from ethical point of view. Its not an excuse or justification. If I stall ten dollars from the pocket of Sultan of Brunei, maybe its just “carry a little weight and little impact” to him, because he is very rich. But, from ethical point of view, still I connot do it.. Maling, betapapun kecil impaknya bagi seseorang, tetaplah perbuatan yang salah..

    Like

  34. I’m sorry, I really don’t see where people slagged Yusril’s wife in Indonesia matters? They said that she’s gorgeous, they said they couldn’t understand why she was with him but that’s actually slagging him, not her. And I don’t think that a politician/public figure should be so thin skinned. People slag public figures all the time. It’s one of the disadvantages of being a public figure. And one of the advantages about being a nobody is that you can slag em. I really don’t see any fitnah belaka going on in Indonesia Matters about Pak Yusril.
    And as a side point, I do use my real name, doesn’t mean anything to you who don’t know who I am anyway.. so what’s the point, except now I have to live in fear with someone turning up on my front doorstep in the middle of the night to deport me! Hey, that could be Yusril’s first act as president if he gets elected, To deport from Indonesia someone who disagreed with him on the blogosphere! What a big hearted fellow!

    Like

  35. @janma:
    lol, even if u dont use ur real name, u are easy to be tracked lah… you have a son(or sons?), you live in bali, and last october, you encourage people to clean up leluhur’s graveyard. and i can go on and on, with simple cross databasing, i can slim down to 5 people to track your real identity… to me, you are not really that anonymous.

    LOL just kidding… hey, im just feeding your stalker paranoia!

    but later on, i think u might want to be more careful not to say out loud when somebody you know did something questionable, however necessary it was.
    you can say “somebody i know did this or did that” and not “my son did this”

    even though reality differs alot, legally he was only stating the obvious consequences of your statement.

    And that, is another downside of being a habitual anonymous, before long, we become irresponsible to ourselves, and made disadvantageous comments.

    “Hey, that could be Yusril’s first act as president…. who disagreed with him on the blogosphere!”
    hmm.. could be… but he doesnt have enough evidences yet. And i dont think he will waste his time to further damage his own reputation.

    “What a big hearted fellow!”
    this sarcastic conclusion is not yet necessary, but trust me, if you got deported, i will be one of the people who will shout that out loud, there will be riots over that πŸ™‚

    @Pretty:
    in the rasa not so sayang thread, people did manage to evolve, personal attack did happen, but in the end people act in a more civilized and relaxed way. and after long thread we can identify people with their views.

    i cannot recall if it was on that thread, but the sour grape comments were often used when that controversy happened, you might remember something like: “indons are just jealous”, pretty much the same. Or remember the anonymous “malingsiah” comments?

    The difference with yusril case is this, the other person was obviously trying to slander yusril, a public persona.
    It is only fair to give yusril a chance to slander him/her back, right? it is a natural position to ask people who slander him to reveal their identity, to at least let them comment in a more responsible way.
    …and yusril, is obviously a person, not a song.

    but to be fair, yes, im starting to think you are right, maybe identity is not so important at all, as long as people managed to act wisely.

    Like

  36. was dismissed from office by President SBY for his part in helping Tommy
    LOL.., SBY as a military general in Suharto regime did the helping more than people he fired.

    Like

  37. @zombie: To me, abusive comments posted by anyone (anonymous or known) carry no weight and no impact. Opinions, thoughts, questions, suggestions, are different though… They do carry weight as long as it makes people who read it think twice, no matter who is the poster. My comment is still the same, regardless of what nickname I used: Bocah Jakarta, Anak Papua, Bonar Jr, Unspun II, DragonZombie, Andi, Donny, Budi Sujarwo, Ari Mahardika, or my real name. Even if I put my real name, it is still “treated as a nickname” anyway, because all of you don’t know who I am.

    I hope you agree up to this point.

    The only reasons to put real name:
    1) If you are a known (or even unknown) figure and want to gain good reputation
    2) If you are defamed and want to straighten things up
    3) If by putting your real name, your comment will be have much more authority

    And putting “real name” can be dangerous too, because someone can impersonate another person.

    In the virtual world, where truth is something seemingly “unheard of”, anonymity is norm, identity theft is flourishing, and security can be easily compromised, I don’t see the point putting real name. Someone may still detect me if they are doing cross-referencing and IP detection, but at least I’m limiting those who can detect me to just a few experts on the field.

    I agree it is not the ideal thing to do, but in my eyes, it is the best thing to do. Echoing what pretty has said, respect is much more important.

    @saiyo sakato: Whoa! saiyo-san, did you just putting being anonymous is the same as stealing? being anonymous is like committing SIN? Whoa, that’s too much…. waaay too much.

    To end my post, the person who demanded me to put my real name are:
    1) someone who rise from the dead?
    2) Indonesian-speaking Japanese?
    *I hope you understand my joke*

    Like

  38. @arema, you do something or say something to other people, and then you also to be a judge how far he/she got affected? So, attack someone with abusive language, and than you decide yourself its “carry not weight and no impact” to her/him. If you do it to yourself, of course its true. But if you do to other people, and he/she has the right to complaint. The judgment should be made by the third party… This is the basic thinking in legal matters..

    Like

  39. Arema, whoa! Den mas Arema, ambo iko urang awak… bukan Jepang (I am a Minangkabau, not a Japanese… but its not important, right? Saiyo sakato means “seiya sekata”). BTW please read once again my post carefully. Anonymous or real name are not the problem of ethics. Its not my concern..

    I did not say “anonynous same as stealing”. What I said is a comparison between “slandering/attacking someone with abusive language” and “stealing” and their impact to the real person, as your opinion. That’s realy two equal categories of ethical norm that we can compare each other. Whenever ethical norm adopted by legislative body and formulated as a law in a country, it become a legal norm. Sorry to tell something about legal philopsophy..

    Like

  40. i wonder why something always landed on my backyard??? πŸ™‚

    @Pretty: missed me? haha actually kamarul is my real name. honestly im not interested to comment on this issue as i know nothing about this but um let me remind this to all of you…

    the matters between this whoever yusril guy and his wife is their matters. we whoever we are dont have any damn right to discuss this rumah tangga issue in public. um unless his wife was being abused or something. anything they wana do, its left to them… i remembered an old malay saying, ” Jangan jaga tepi kain orang”

    being anonymous in this blogosphere is one’s privilege, nobody can question that. but um then when making accusation, that person must be responsible for his acts.

    another thing that i newly noticed, if those who commented on this thread are mostly indonesians, i have a good advice for uguys. its easy to accuse others especially when that person dont know who u are.

    so whether u r muslim onot, an Islam saying, ” the sin of making fitnah is far more than killing” Fitnah is unproven accusation. whether the reality that person really guilty but when we accuse that person based on no proof then even u r considered sinned.

    so better watch ur mouth or ur fingers…unproven accusation cause damages more catastrophe than killing somebody… πŸ™‚

    Like

  41. wb mr. kamarul!!!!

    we were talking about a politician blogger, hes been in minister positions several times, and was a contender for presidency back in 99.
    To me, personally, hes unlikeable.
    nevertheless, i couldnt agree with people who slandered him using logical fallacies and hid behind anonymity. However, he made things worse when he implied a threat to prosecute a bystander (janma).

    thats the summary.

    Like

  42. @zombie: I think we’re not exactly talking about the same thing here… okay, let me jump over to your side then…

    Okay, let me rephrase, maybe only to me, abusive comments carry little to no weight. If someone said it to me in an online forum, I’ll just consider it as an immature post from an 11 years old kid and move on. However, if it’s a well-written post and REALLY HIT me in the right spot, that’s when I concede the argument and thank that person for slapping me back to reality. I think that’s the way adult do discussion and criticize one another.

    But, I don’t expect I can treat all abuse directed to me like that. Every person have different degree of resistance against abuse. Some really well-crafted abuse can hit you “in the right spot” as well, and suddenly you went berserk before you know it. Maybe that happened to Mr Yusril when Dragonwall “tickled” him. For an ex-minister to say “potong kemaluan anda sendiri”…. wow, that must have been a terrible insult. It is. This is the thing that should be avoided.

    So my conclusion is: abusive comments should be avoided at all cost. We have to be responsible for our comments, and respect one another. But we can still be responsible and yet anonymous, like we did, and I sincerely think that’s the way to go. If we respond in a civilized way against an abuser, he/she will reciprocate in a civilized way too, at least that’s what I observed in IM. Maybe we can’t prevent others from using abusive language, but we do can steer the discussion to the way we want it, that is, a quality discussion. And for me, a quality post is a quality post, regardless whether the poster is anonymous or not.

    Let me quote something from the Bible: “Tetapi, jika seterumu lapar berilah dia makan, jika dia haus berilah dia minum. Dengan berbuat begitu kamu menumpuk bara api di atas kepalanya. Janganlah kamu kalah terhadap kejahatan, tetapi kalahkanlah kejahatan dengan kebaikan. ”
    (Roma 12:20-21)

    @saiyo sakato: oh, is that so? hahahaha, I’m sorry, but that sounds 100% Japanese. Just repeating what I said above, slandering someone while being anonymous (or not) should be avoided at all cost. But anonymous is not the core problem, slandering is. R-E-S-P-E-C-T is the key.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: