There’s a discussion over at Tomorrow.sg regarding the Idledays Fund.
It’s painful for me to see all the misconceptions and the flaming going on in there, so I felt compelled to write this. Unless otherwise stated, these are my personal views and replies to some of the questions.
Why are you printing the blog to a book?
We are doing this for those who were closest to her - her family and her boyfriend (now in UK).
Would she have allowed this? I believe very strongly that she would. But more of this later.
Can’t they just read it online?
Yes, they can read it online, but the experience is different. Would you rather recieve a physical love letter, or a love email (if the words are the same). Most people would prefer the former. Also, not everyone in the family is net savvy.
Do they actually want it?
Yes. We checked with a close family member.
How about the private (password-protected) posts?
We won’t be printing those.
Why do you want to keep her blog/URL alive?
Her blog touched me, and I’d like to see it remain alive, so that it can touch others as well (Google cache, Internet archives, etc. just doesn’t work in terms of accessibility and user experience.)
I do not wish to see the URL idledays.net turn into something else. That’s just me.
Couldn’t you guys do it privately instead of making a big hoo-ha?
It certainly wasn’t intended to be a big hoo-ha.
We certainly could have done this privately, without risk of all these criticisms, but I personally preferred to do this publicly, because she was more than an editor of Tomorrow.sg - she contributed much to our local blogosphere, and I felt that those of you who were touched by her blog would also like the opportunity to contribute, and not keep this as an exclusive project.
If I’m not a Tomorrow editor, I would have been grateful for this opportunity to contribute. In fact, I would have been angry if I wasn’t given the opportunity to contribute.
Why not spend the money on research or other worthier causes?
We’ve stated quite clearly the intentions of the fund - it’s okay if you don’t feel like you wish to contribute to this, but there are others who want to.
I don’t tell people what they should do with their money. If you want to put your money in a cancer research fund, or a newspaper subscription, or the latest mobile phone, it’s none of my business. All we’re doing is give you another option to use your money.
Doesn’t she want to keep her blog private, away from her family?
Maybe so, when she was alive. Whether she would have wanted the blog to be printed for her family or not, no one can say for sure.
The next best thing we can do, then, is come to a decision based on what we know about her, and what seems best for her loved ones.
Much has already been said by the other editors on this, but I have these to add:
- As far as her family was concerned, she didn’t try to hide the fact that she was blogging. As for who in her family knows how much and what, I don’t know, nor do I think it necessary to check with them on this. For those who ask such hair-splitting questions, I doubt you have sincere intentions.
- She had friends online and offline. But the people who know the most about her way of blogging (including privacy and anonymity issues) are her friends from Tomorrow.sg. We understand why she wanted to remain anonymous. When we met, guess what we often talked about? When we debated online, guess what we often debated about? When we bitched about other people, guess who we bitched about? Blogs, blogging, and bloggers. We may not have known her forever, but put together, we know her blogging intentions pretty well.
Given these reasons and others, we could very well have done nothing. We chose to do something.
And I chose to be a part of this, because I confidently believe this is the right thing to do.
* * * * *
I keep thinking of what Clay Shirky said, which I quoted in an old post (Blogosphere Wars):
It is a deep curiosity of the human condition that people often find negative attention more satisfying than inattention…
* * * * *
You may post further questions or comments, but do note that I have a rather whimsical view on censorship, as far as my blog is concerned.

A good FAQ…hope others will understand.
Comment by cockroach//蟑螂 — December 7, 2005 @ 1:02 pm
Hi Tinker Tailor,
Reading your post is like a breath of fresh air. It is good to be able to discuss this in a more civil manner. I understand the part about you guys (being her friends) wanting to do something in memory of her. I also understand the part whereby some people may object to publishing her blog to a book form. Different groups of her friends would naturally have different views and opinions.
However, I feel that why it became a big hoo-ha is due to the way it is handled. It was made into a tomorrow.sg project. It seems like being editors of tomorrow.sg get special treatment. I really don’t think this project would have happened if she was not an editor of tomorrow.sg. It does seem to suggest the being editors of tomorrow.sg is a privilege social circle. I really hope I’m wrong in this.
Imagine a different scenario. If the project was privately led by Cowboy Caleb doing the same thing, then it gets mentioned in tomorrow.sg like a normal feature. That way, it wouldn’t be an exclusive nor viewed as a tomorrow.sg special project. And for those who would like to contribute (like yourself) would still be able to.
The thing is, all Singapore bloggers are part of the ecosystem of the local blogosphere. When it becomes a special project of tomorrow.sg, you are directly getting everyone involved. It is not just a simple matter of “If you don’t like it, don’t donate” kind of thing.
Sigh, I don’t write well but I hope you understand the point I’m trying so hard to drive at.
Comment by Cobalt Paladin — December 7, 2005 @ 1:19 pm
i have deleted DW and yennyl’s comments because they are addressing things i’ve already addressed, or are not worth addressing.
this is my blog, and i don’t wish for my readers to waste time reading stuff that’s been covered.
cobalt: i do this because her blog touched my life, not because she was an editor.
now, what if we didn’t do this on Tomorrow? we’d still be criticised (”she was part of Tmr, how come u don’t use Tmr to do it? not all of u like her isit?”). what if we did this secretly? if someone finds out, we’d also be criticised (”why u never include us? we also read her blog wat! u think u Tmr editors very special isit?”). what if we don’t do anything? guess what? we’d STILL be criticised (”she was part of Tmr, and u guys just sit there and do nothing for her site and family?”).
farfetched? looking at some of the criticisms we’ve gotten so far, i don’t think this is farfetched.
we can’t win, but we will do what we believe is best and right, whether it’s popular or not.
notice the first few comments were very positive and supportive. it became a big hoo-ha when someone started complaining publicly and loudly, when they could have done so quietly and privately, and way before we set up the fund.
Comment by tinkertailor — December 7, 2005 @ 2:26 pm
It is great that you’ve posted your comments as it clarifies a few things. It would have been better if tomorrow.sg editors could have an official response addressing the concerns that many had expressed. It is definitely not helping when some editors of tomorrow.sg had been condescending to the comments of some posters at tomorrow.sg.
Granted that your postulated scenario may happen as well but I believe they can be easier and better addressed.
Even though the first few comments were positive and supportive, they were not representative of the views of the people. In terms of statistics, the sample size would have been too small. I know it is disappointing how this has developed but the later views should not be discounted.
How could we have commented quietly and privately before we were informed regarding the set up of the fund? Sorry but I’m a bit confused by your last statement.
Anyway, I don’t think this is a matter of winning or losing. But more of accomodating and addressing the views of those who have voiced them.
Comment by Cobalt Paladin — December 7, 2005 @ 4:50 pm
“How could we have commented quietly and privately before we were informed regarding the set up of the fund?”
they could have commented on this when mrbrown posted her name and pic on his blog. but no, they didn’t.
anyway, as i see it, a lot of the comments are coming from people who are just there to argue. they have no intention of contributing to the fund. i don’t want to spend more of my time on them. my FAQ is enough to address the questions of those who are genuinely interested, and i hope you’re one of them. i’m not interested in a debate, this is why i’ve removed a few comments coming in.
don’t be fooled by a vocal minority. donations are already coming in - this tells me that there are those who are convinced that we’re doing the right thing. i’m happy to ignore those who don’t, unless they’ve got better reasons than those i’ve seen so far.
as for the comments by various Tmr editors, we keep repeating that we don’t usually have a single voice. some editors like to troll, others like to put FAQs on their blogs.
Comment by tinkertailor — December 7, 2005 @ 5:20 pm
If the blog belonged to Sondra (as in possessions) then after her death, shouldnt her blog then belong to the family? esp her parents? they have the sole right to do what they want with it regardless of what Sondra may have told her friends. If you believe that Sondra truly wanted that her blog be kept private from them, then i suggest those who believe so tell her parents that. You would after all be informing them of her “wishes”
If they (parents) approve of what the Tmr editors are doing, why should Sondra’s friends naysay it? Her blog is like a diary (a personal possession). Unless she left strict written instructions on what to do with it in the event of her death her parents should be the ones making the decisions on what to do with it or in this case approving/disapproving the actions of the tmr editors
Sondra is dead. She no longer cares what happens to her blog or who reads it. Cope with your own grief some other way. Don’t start name-calling and quarreling with each other in the name of “sondra’s wishes” when she has not left you any written instructions on what to do with her blog. Only her parents and family have any right to it now. If you have any issues with what the tmr editors are doing, discuss it with her parents and family.
Blogs are for the living, not the dead.
Comment by Seth — December 7, 2005 @ 7:28 pm
I think there is a misunderstanding here. I was referring to the setting up of the fund. I don’t think Mr. Brown’s blog mentioned anything about setting up any fund. Anyway, just for the record, I’m genuinely interested about the issue because I’m passionate about tomorrow.sg. That’s why I bothered to share my views.
I’m glad that donations have been made and I’m not surprised. Singapore bloggers are a caring community. I hope you don’t forget that. It has never been a case of tomorrow.sg editors vs non-editors. I believe everyone just wanted to make tomorrow.sg a better place.
As pointed out by Jseng and yourself, I only recently come to know that tomorrow.sg does not have a unified voice. The views expressed by the editors in tomorrow.sg are just personal views. It would be helpful if there is a permanent place that clearly states that. It would avoid confusion among readers (like myself) who did not know.
However, I would think that as tomorrow.sg matures, it would be better to have an official voice. Else, to outsiders, it may look like 一盘散沙. No offence intended. Just sharing my views and I’m also not interested in a debate. Thanks for allowing me to share my views in your blog.
Comment by Cobalt Paladin — December 7, 2005 @ 7:51 pm
TinkerTailor: This is by far the best effort by a Tomorrow editor at addressing the issues at hand. It’s professional public relations in action! I tend to agree with Cobalt Paladin that having one official voice would help Tomorrow’s cause better, much like how this post helped me write mine!
Comment by Kevin — December 9, 2005 @ 1:22 pm
kevin: i wasn’t doing this for PR.
anyway, Tmr is an effort by an informal bunch of jokers who seldom agree so we contradict ourselves. how to be ‘official’ this way?
Comment by tinkertailor — December 9, 2005 @ 2:44 pm
Tinker,
I admire the way you handled the issue and provided clarification from your own viewpoint.
Comment by anon — December 9, 2005 @ 3:34 pm