My Mistakes, Blogging Philosophy & Communication Principles

I have received feedback that my self-righteous post (Closing thoughts for 2013) has drawn ire from the protagonist and the supporting actors.

Their claim was that my entire post sounded as if I had entirely no fault at all. I'm sorry if it gave you all that impression. Thing is, I never did claim I was entirely right and I was never faultless in this entire process. I was just pouring out my thoughts (not facts or "truth") and frustration and naming the conclusion.

I didn't mention any of my mistakes because I felt they weren't the salient pointers that I wanna bring out in that blog post. Nevertheless, I will enumerate the mistake-riddled actions on my part and give my rebuttal and questions again for this whole issue.

3 parts to this post and I hope it will answer and clarify most things.

Honestly, I'm just so tired of all these. All I really just wanna do is give them all one big hug and lovingly affirm my love for them. I did, I am and I always will love each and every one of those people mentioned.

And if we agree to disagree, I will gladly extend that hand of reconciliation. I have extended it to miss bff already actually. And she was open to it...until I let her in on my previous post -_-"

I honestly regret letting you all into my thoughts. Should I have acted out my conclusion, without them knowing my mental path and past frustrations, everything would be ok. Haiss. Honesty, as proven in this instance, is not the best policy. I will elaborate more in the "Blogging Philosophy" part.

I was, I am and I will always be open for communication and I will NOT resort to actions like "You think for yourself why we are avoiding you lor. What caused us to stay away? You go and think for yourself."

And..."You think is we don't know how to answer your questions? Is we don't bother answering your questions. Ask yourself why."

Such statements are relationship destroyers and I've watched these thought patterns destroy so many relationships.

If were to tell them the same thing "You go ask yourself why I'm reacting like that lor" and expect them to discover their faults, we'll be simply at a communication-less stalemate.

Saying something is better than nothing because saying nothing DOES NOTHING. Plain logic right? But hey, some people just don't like things plain. I will elaborate this in the "communication principles" section; replete with analogies and examples.

The thing is, I don't feel totally wrong for the things I'm being "accused" for. And through this entire post I will elaborate.

I'm not being self-righteous. But for what I'm seeing, all the wrongs are simply tall orders, uncalled expectations, unchecked conclusions and specious interpretation.

If I'm being self-righteous, I wouldn't even let you into my thoughts and ask you to contest my thinking.

If I'm a stuck-up, arrogant, Pharisee, I would've just stick to my thinking and tell you "You go figure for yourself why I'm doing this."

This is very much what they're doing actually. So yeah. But granted, there are several factors that did cause that reaction too, to which I will also elaborate.

Haisss...Ok, lemme begin...

My Mistakes

What did I do wrong?
1) Transmission error.

The whole thing started because there were pernicious reports going to her ear. When I heard them, it was plain, outlandish, absurd bullshit.

But then again, the fact that such awesome stories can get to her ear means that maybe I did not relate the story properly.

Knowing myself as a joker and exaggerator, sometimes I may dramatize things (which brings more tickles than stares). So maybe some of them took them as real.

For that, I'm truly sorry if there were parts that I misrepresented us.

Truth is, when I checked with some of my sources, they really did remember some stories wrongly. I shan't give examples of the wrong stories here because it's not appropriate and it profits no one. Yeah, I guess people just remember it wrongly and it's most probably due to my drama-mama moments.

I'm not faulting any of my friends who remembered descriptions or details of what I said wrongly because it's but natural and only human to misrepresent people - we don't have perfect memory.

But as far as I'm concerned, I remember no specific instance of deliberate fabrication of any of the stories you've heard.

Secondly, upon further deliberation with my friends, what started out as a good intention became a disastrous outcome.

I shared the story because I wanted it to be a blessing, a testimony that will encourage and build faith in my SELECT FEW listeners and therefore I shared the story of how God seeded the beginning and how He intervened in the end.

But guess what? People only remembered the in-betweens. I was telling my friends over dinner "I let you guys know so that you will see the whole storyline and see how beautiful the story is and how awesome author God is."

Their reply came "哎哟, 哪里有人管storyline的? People only want to hear the in between juicy details nia."

And then it occurred to me that, that is totally true! Some people watch movies like Transformers 2 just for Megan Fox and some watch a lousy movie just for some particular R21 bed scene or naked scene and they're done - THAT'S ALL THEY REMEMBER.

STORYLINE? WHAT STORYLINE?

I guess this was one of my gravest mistakes. Because usually (Lemme emphasize - usually) before I do most things, I'll ask myself "Does it glorify God? Does it profit anyone? What good does it do?"

And my answer to this question before divulging the story was "Yeah, it'll glorify Him and it'll breed faith in people when they see that God is the cosmic author of each and every one's life story."

And the other driving point is - whether people listen or not, your job is to do the preaching. Whether people listened or not, Jesus still preached the Good News. Whether your friends believe in God eventually or not, you still share Christ with them! Whether your friends buy the insurance or not, you still sell it to them! Why? Because you never know the outcome! You do what you need to do!

Therefore, I did what I did. I hung on to the thin thread of hope that people will appreciate the story in its fullness and see Christ glorified and not feast on the insignificant details and propagate them erroneously. But to my dismay, it seemed like the latter outdid the former.

I know some friends of mine really appreciated the story in its full plot but to my dismay, some did not. Some of them went on to relate their imperfect memories and misrepresented my words to my insecure lil' bff. Much also (lemme emphasize ALSO) to her rage and dismay.

The thing here to note is - only a small handful of people know the story. People whom I considered close enough to know. Thus, the collateral damage inflicted wouldn't be that far and wide.

I hope you see the logic and thinking behind my every action and how the outcome which I hoped for didn't come to pass.

For that, I'm really sorry. I guess my "good intentions" should not have gotten the better of me.

Justifications & questions:

And as much as I dramatize, joke and exaggerate, my friends will know that I'm doing it because, it's just ME. In my drama I do not distort the truth, I just dramatize it and all of my good friends know that. If every word that come out of me were such blatant lies, how'd you even have trusted me in the first place?

And how'd I have been held in high regard by so many friends for my honesty? Because I have so many of them confiding in me their problems and stories. You mean to tell me there is such a lack of people in this world who are trust-able that they have to come to me?

Lastly, when you hear such stories, the first thing you blame is the transmitter? So the receiver is PERFECT? There's no signal distortion or misinterpretation on the receiver's part? So whatever you hear from them is TRUTH? And I have no tuft of truth in me? You choose to trust these new "sources" over me after all the honesty I've CONSISTENTLY displayed the past few months? Honestly, that's how much I'm worth?

Drawing from the analogy of my previous post:

"Let's say news reports allege that I'm a murderer - let's say I killed my bff (it's actually a discovery science channel programme. LOL).
What will be the first course of action my parents or best friends will take?
Will they straight away come and condemn me "JONAVAN YOU MURDERER!!! LOOK AT THE NEWS!!!"
Nope they won't.
They trust me ENOUGH NOT TO believe the news report and they'll instead come to me and asked "WHAT HAPPENED?" in all open-mindedness.
The same goes for me if any of my best friends get caught in a web of consistent rumours and false reports. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and ask them "What happened man? I'm here for you".
My dear bff was the exact opposite - she immediately believed the "murder reports" and came and condemn me. So much for the title "bff" eh?
Fine, she's also the affected party. Well now we're both affected parties. So what should we do? Stick to our cliques and let those fallacious thoughts fester? NO. We should sit down and resolve the issue together.
THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT SHE IS NOT DOING."

Please honestly consider all my justifications and ANSWER all my questions above. My apologies are as real as my justifications & questions.

Conclusion:
I have already apologized to her personally many times for the possible mis-truth that came out from me and this will once again be another instance of my apology.

I am sorry. I am truly sorry for what happened. This is never what I intended and grants me no benefit whatsoever to have said any of the things you've been hearing.

And as I always say "You can't control what people do; but you can control how you react to what people can do." And I'm here hoping that you will act in love, maturity and graciousness.

As asked in my Christmas card to you, "Will you forgive me?" And I will ask again, "Will you forgive me? This eccentric boy who once carried the label 'bff' and whom you shared so much with."

I'm so tired of this. I truly am. We are more than this. We are bigger than this. We are worth more than this. For the past, the present and the beautiful future, you were, you are and will always be a friend I will not want to lose.

2) Self-righteous TONE.

I have apologized many, many times for this issue already. From the onset when I was informed of the story misfits (via whatsapp), I apologized.

My apology probably didn't seep in because I had tons of counter-questions which were burning in me which I aired because burying those questions would only cause an implosion within me.

That barrage of questions probably led them to think that my apology wasn't all too penitential an act.

Fact is, my apology is as real as those questions.

Nonetheless, I'm sorry for putting forth so forcefully my questions such that it becomes like an interrogation and cause you all to think me unrepentant and self-righteous.

Justifications & questions:

Do questions & justifications nullify an apology? Is it wrong to apologize and justify and question within the same instance of discussion? Are they oxymoronic in nature? Are they mutually exclusive? Are those questions illegitimate?

Once again, my apology is as real as the questions I have. To take one and not the other or to see one and reject the other is to see the whipped cream on the cake and reject the whole cake because you hate whipped cream.

Conclusion:

I am sorry for portraying myself as totally in the right. I guess I could've phrased things better and not sound like a prideful lion roaring his questions away.

Truly I am sorry. This is one area I've been grappling with and working on. As I always say, we are all works in progress. No one is perfect.

But I hope you see that the roaring of my questions does NOT nullify the whisper of my apology and steadfastness of my love for you.

3) Storm bringer.

Throughout my discourse and discussion of this issue with my friends, they all pointed out this one thing about me - I bring a storm of questions, truth and emotions.

The best phrased description of this issue went something like this:

Jonavan, we all love being with you because when there's no conflict you, you bring us a lot of joy, inspiration and laughter. But when conflict arises, you bring a storm of questions, truth and emotions. Jon, you have good pointers and questions most of the time. But the way you bring it across is like sending a tornado to people's faces and however correct you may be, people won't swallow it well because they feel attacked. This storm you send is a tight slap to people's faces and it turns them off and makes them don't want to reply you.

This is kinda linked to the second point. But for this point it focuses more on the issue of pride and impatience. I've asked myself why many times.

At the bottom of this storm is a mixture of frustration, pride and impatience. The unanswered questions brews strong emotions within me that gets me into full debate-interrogation mode.

The main push is my impatience. I'm someone who wants the answers ASAP and I also give my answers ASAP. I've got a whole blog post on that already titled "Backing Off".

I'm learning that sometimes, all it takes is some time and space for things to settle. It can be analogized as sweeping a room full of dust. If you keep vigorously sweeping and sweeping, the dust will simply keep flying and flying. But if you're patient, wait and let the dust settle and then start sweeping, only then will your sweeping of the dust be effective.

Yup, I believe I've exercised this concept recently by backing off. But yeah, much is still to be learnt and improved.

Another factor is - pride. Where I believe I am in the right and therefore I go about missile-ing questions with such "moral authority". The pride syndrome also leads to quick justifications before the much needed apology.

For that, I am really sorry. I guess my pride and impatience got the better of me in such heated emotional and logical showdowns.

Justifications & questions:

Apologizing multiple times for the same issue is - I know - kinda lame. But for issues like this, I need you to help me help myself. In a relationship, it's not just about pointing out each other's flaws but to lovingly guide and help each other become someone better for each other and for others.

As much as my pride affects my quick justifications, it doesn't affect my search for truth in the debate. It was NEVER about winning the argument but seeing your perspective and to what degree it is legitimate.

If you ever have a point that is clear cut my fault that I didn't see, I will apologize. Because I believe everyone has their blind-spots and if you could show me mine through the debate, my pride will not get in the way.

My pride only makes my justifications come out before the apology. It doesn't affect my search for truth in your perspective.

As such, debates with me are NEVER POINTLESS. If it were pointless, I wouldn't even start it. I start it because I have a point to bring across and you probably have points to bring across as well.

EVERYONE IS PRIDEFUL in their own self-righteous way. It's only to what degree and how honest they are about it.

Conclusion

I am sorry for the many storms and the deafening roars. I guess that's what turned you away and triggered a nonchalant, silent response.

Help me to help myself.

When I start becoming that roaring lion, remind me lovingly that my mane is growing too thick that you can't see my face any longer. Something like that:

After all, that's what friends are for right? To help each other learn and grow through this journey.

4) Not upholding limited viewership.

I am truly sorry for not privatizing my blog because "outsiders" may read it and misunderstand the complicated context of my posts.

My blog is like my diary and yes it should only be shown to the very few close friends and family in my life that truly love and understand me.

By not privatizing it, my blog is like a website where everyone can come in, read, comment, share and possibly tarnish people's reputation.

For that, I am very sorry. I am working on a new blog now which requires password access on wordpress and I am still in the midst of making it happen.

Justifications & questions:

Are blogs meant to be truth? Even affidavits submitted to the court of law are not truth and can be contested! You believe the newspaper and the sources around you more than me. Are those sources truth? Who are you to define truth in my posts anyway? For all the "errors" you have pointed out, I can show you how you have misinterpreted my words.

For whatever I've blogged so far, all the feedback I've been getting from my friends and online followers are 98% positive. They've dropped me comments and my friends have verbally encouraged me by telling me how they've benefited from my posts on God, faith and online followers have thanked me for sharing insights on school life, my braces journey, army life, travel trips, etc...

And out of all these I only remember 2 people not agreeing with some of my posts publicly. And now there's this bunch of new found friends also getting angry over this.

Seeing things on a net scale, privatizing my entire blog will only appease the handful of people that are narrow-mindedly contesting my posts and depriving many others from benefiting from the many anecdotes and experiences I've shared on my blog.

As such, I have decided not to privatize my blog. After all, not many people read my blog anyway. All these relational entanglement posts draw very little viewership compared to the other posts and thus, I will refrain from privatizing this blog.

If those controversial relationship posts start drawing massive viewership (of more than 200++ views), then I will privatize my blog to curb it's potential to become viral. As of now, the viewership is only a tiny fraction of what I define as "massive viewership", which is - compared to many other blogs and websites - NOT massive at all.

For the un-initiated in blogging, Google's blogger does not allow privatization or password access for a particular post - they only allow you to privatize the entire blog. This is a major limitation in using Blogger. I wonder why they don't include the option of password protecting certain posts like what Wordpress and LiveJournal offers.

So yup, I am not privatizing my entire blog history of 6 years for the minority few that cannot take my potent ruminations.

If my posts are that pestiferous in nature, sue me. I'd like to see how your lawyer can prosecute me. My posts are all a matter of opinion and does not tantamount to libel.

I will elaborate more in the section "Blogging Philosophy" as of now, these are my questions and justifications.

Conclusion:

Once again, I'm sorry for not privatizing my blog. The consequence of this could lead to people's reputation being tarnished but for the reasons mentioned above, I will not privatize it.

I am working on a private blog now. It'll take a lot of time because getting the layout, design and coding right really is time-consuming especially when I'm running late on my FYP and striving for my second-lower.

Yup, I'm sorry if my thoughts have hurt you. But these are my thoughts and they require an outlet. Please refrain from entering my mind of drama, exaggeration, logic and argumentation if you cannot handle the perspective of my eccentric mind.

Thanks for your understanding.

Should you think me still very self-righteous, or don't feel wrong enough, let me elaborate why. It's probably because we hold different definitions of blogging and communication.

In the next 2 sections I will elaborate on these. If you can show me how my definitions are wrong, I will definitely update my definition and philosophy stacks and you will see true sorry-ness flow out. As for now, these definitions are things you should consider before judging me.

Blogging Philosophy

When questioned and challenged, always fall back on definition. I am someone who always have my definition of things very clear (clearer than most people that is).

Before I give my definition of what a blog should be, let me give you the orthodox, accepted definition by Wikipedia and various dictionaries, lest you label me self-righteous for positing my own definition.

Wikipedia:

A blog (a truncation of the expression web log) is a discussion or informational site published on the world wide web and consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed in reverse chronological order (the most recent post appears first).

Dictionary.com:
A website containing a writer's or group of writers' own experiences, observations, opinions, etc., and often having images and links to other websites.

Merriam-Webster dictionary:
A website that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer.

My interpretation of what a blog is:

My blog is my diary, my written expression of my thoughts. I blog so that I can crystallize my thoughts, structure them and examine them in a systematic way that is store-able and share-able (to the few eskimos and rare friends interested in my thoughts) so that when I read it in 5 to 10 years time, I can smile and know how much I've grown through the vivid moments and thoughts captured at that point in time.

Keeping complicated trains of thought in my mind only clutters it up and does not allow me to think straight and thus blogging will allow me to express my ruminations step by step.

Thus, my blog is a place where the tap is turned on and my thoughts flow out and overflows into people's minds.

My blog - A tap, an outlet for my thoughts

If you noticed in the picture above, behind the tap there's a sign that says "DANGER HOT WATER". And indeed, my thoughts are flaming, boiling, HOT WATER.

If it doesn't inspire, it offends. If it doesn't make your smile grow wider, it'll make your frown go tighter. If it doesn't make you laugh wildly, it'll make you swear hysterically.

Should you get scalded by its thermal intensity, please stay away from the kitchen. This is who I am, what I think. I'm controversial. I'm not here to be mediocre or politically correct; life's too short for that.

As my blog is like a diary, it should be privatized if not it will be no different from a website. However, for reasons mentioned above in point 4 under the "My Mistakes" section, I have decided not to privatize it.

As a blog is usually a collection of anecdotes, opinions, experiences, observations, reflections, comments and personal thoughts, it is nowhere expected to be "truth". It is simply an expression of perception and never expected to be truth.

Nothing in this world is truth. Only God's Word is truth. As we examine different sets of information - textbooks, lecture notes, newspapers, online articles, etc. - to the best of our discretion, we then accept it as relatively true.

Same goes for you. Is what you're trying to tell me considered "truth"? No! It's also a matter of your perception of "truth", of which I am contesting now.

Therefore, getting angry with what I write is to get angry with what other people are thinking in their heads.

The thing is, how do you get angry with what people think in their heads unless they show or tell you?

And for me, I've been honest enough to give you the privilege of entering my thoughts and getting angry is, yes, expected.

But hey, do you ever stop to appreciate the fact that I bother to share what's going on inside me?

Do you know how vulnerable I am after revealing these thoughts to you? I trust that you can handle my thoughts and not use them against me - by sharing it maliciously or cutting me off altogether.

Do others ever share their thoughts such explicitly and detailed-ly with you? If they do, cherish them, for they trust you with their innermost convictions and road to their conclusion.

Ok, back to the structured way I want to present this post...

Accusation:

The issue at hand is my few friends are angry with me for blogging things that are untrue. They lay claim that I've smeared their reputation. Here's my response:

Response:

I am sorry if there are instances of ambiguous or inaccurate diction which could lead to a misguided interpretation. But the use of hyperbola is but my style of writing and for every wrong representation, I apologize.

To mollify your concerns and feelings of betrayal, I've already rectified my post and replaced those controversial terms with more pleasant ones that still bring my point across.

Following the definitions of what a blog is, there is LITTLE GROUND for them to be angry. A blog is a place to rant, to be real, to be honest - NOT a place to be politically correct or to be truthful in every perspective...which is what they expect.

As mentioned earlier, even affidavits filed in the court of law are truth only in a certain context and is subject to prosecution. Is my blog to be more than that?

I've also read up on the liability of bloggers to be sued in the court of law and my blog is relatively deep in the safe zone.

Legally speaking, "Minor inaccuracies are generally not subject to libel if the overall context of the statement is substantially true."

The statements pointed out by my friends will not even be entertained by the court of law because the overall context of the statements contested ARE SUBSTANTIALLY TRUE.

I even go the extra mile to justify why I use certain adjectives in some cases. Terms such as "lover" are ambiguous in nature and subject how the reader interprets it. Don't they both love each other? One of them really loves the other a lot and that is even expressed verbally and observed blatantly by the friends around us. Hence, isn't the term "lover" appropriate?

The accusation of me "smearing" people's reputation is also unfounded.

Did I share the link of that post on Facebook? Did I put this up in some discussion forum? Did I rant on social media about whatever has happened and ask everyone to take a dig?

None of the above.

I only posted this in my obscure little blog which only drew 8 views (before the viewership upsurge due to miss bff sharing it with her/our friends).

Once again, falling back on definition, it is but legitimate to blog thoughts.

I want to capture the moment of thought-flow, however erroneous. But I feel, compared to many other hate blogs and ranting blogs, mine is filled with thought and structure.

Hence, to accuse me of "smearing" is inappropriate unless I publish it big on social media, forums and discussion pages and attempt to get a huge army of readers.

To take it further, some people (leaders of organizations) even have established websites erected for the sole purpose of smearing their reputation.

Pastors of mega-churches, prominent speakers and leaders all have their fair share of hate blogs and websites put up to tear them down. Do they get angry? Probably. But they take things in stride because I believe they understand the definition of what a blog is.

So please, my puny little blog will do little harm and besides, it is not written with the intention to do harm in the first place.

Conclusion

I am sorry for the possible mis-truths that could've been propagated through my hyperbolic style of writing and I've already edited the contested terminology you've pointed out.

Yes, it's okay to get angry. I think I will get angry too if I happen to read things blogged about me that are utterly outlandish.

The thing is, my anger won't last long because such rubbish will 不攻自破 and I understand that the authors are writing in a moment of folly and exaggeration. We do things like that all the time.

In my conversations with you guys too, you all say things that you don't really mean. Exaggerate, joke and stretch the boundaries and we all just laugh about it. That's what friends are for right? To live the silly moments and enjoy the shared views together, however untrue.

So those moments shared together of laughing and berating other people are fine. Why? Because the affected party is uninformed. And the affected party is NOT one of us.

As to why you (the affected party) is informed, I will elaborate in the last section: Communication Principles.

So I hope you will check the grounds for your accusations and anger and see that I'm not "anyhow scolding people in my frustration".

This is a place of crystallized thought, questions and APOLOGY and not just plain old grandmother scolding.

Communication Principles

“A friend is a person with whom I may be sincere. Before him I may think aloud.” Emerson

If this is the definition of a friend, then probably I need to revisit our relationship. My blog is merely me THINKING ALOUD in all SINCERITY.

I let you into my thoughts and now here you are getting angry and judging me. I let you have the PRIVILEGE of knowing what I'm thinking and this is what I get?

Detectives would've wished all killers and psychopaths are like me - honestly blogging their thoughts out - so that they can arrest them before they commit a crime.

But here I am blogging what I think and I am not even appreciated for my honesty. Some people keep poisonous, festering thoughts to themselves and never say it. They hide it behind their smile and poker faces. But here I am keeping things real and honest and this is the payment I receive? Fantastic.

I've seen mothers, wives and friends discuss their husbands, children and relationship problems and in tears and heavy emotion, they describe their spouses and children as "demons", "devils", "pigs", "useless", "hopeless", etc...

Question is, DO THEY STILL LOVE? YES. Those were merely MOMENTS OF POURING OUT. Were those emotional expressions considered "truth"? NO. Far from it. Far from my posts. In the end, do they still love? Does their relationship still stand? YES and YES.

The only difference is when they pour out, they don't share it with the person they're holding these feelings against, unlike stupid me.

So why do I do what I do?

Letting you read my thoughts after I've got them structured is better than verbally spilling my messy thoughts all over your face right? It'd be at least 2 times worse than what you read.

Therefore, sharing my thoughts - in blog form - with you is but one form of COMMUNICATION.

I believe that when I share my thoughts with you, then you will know where I am coming from, so you can better understand me and love me better.

But apparently, this is not the case. So shall I withdraw my honest thoughts from you all from now on?

Yes, I've abode by my communication principle of letting you into my thoughts - via cards, blogs, if not face-to-face. I will always make the effort to establish communication because it is vital to every relationship.

This is in contrast to the communication principle they've been portraying. Drawing from their open-ended, fruitless questions:

"You ask yourself why we like that lo", "Did you even think is we cannot answer or CAN'T BE BOTHERED to answer? Cos we simply know your reaction too."

For the record, I've seen a few of my good friends break up with their best friends over stuff like these. Their best friends just simply gave them this ultimatum "You ask yourself why I'm like that" and broke off all communication.

My poor friend will then have to re-trace everything and try to figure out what went wrong. He/she had to be the bigger person to fall on his/her knees and start searching for the footprints that went off the path.

Mentioned earlier, if two people are intent on solving a problem like this, it can be easily solved by PROPER COMMUNICATION and LOGICAL TRACING.

It was always group effort of building and rectifying problems together in the fundamental understanding that in life, it's about GROWING through things and NOT GOING through things.

All I see in their communication-less rhetoric can be summed up with this analogy:

A son once had this stubborn Chinese mother who refused to accept western medicine. After she survived several strokes and was saved by the "western" doctors, she still refused to believe and accept the doctor's prescription and medication. The son was really pissed that she is just refuting everything the doctors have to recommend. She sternly continues to believe in her Chinese medicine and herbs. 

One day, she suffered a heart attack. She was on the brink of death and the son was there, able to call A&E and save her life like how he did in the previous strokes.
However, this time, the son just left her there, lying on the ground, helpless as the heart attack took her breath away. 

The son was thinking "If I bring her to A&E, she's also going to reject the doctor's help anyway. So what's the use in rescuing her? She can jolly-well think for herself and understand why I did what I did." 

With that thought pattern, his mother passed away.

Was the son correct in doing what he did? He had good reasons to leave her there since she will stubbornly reject the doctor's advice again.

But no, whether the son's mother rejected the doctor's help or not is immaterial because it's the son's responsibility (or anyone's responsibility for that matter) to save a dying life.

Whether or not she will accept the doctor's help is not in the question! The issue at hand is to bring her to the hospital!

In this analogy, I am the pathetic mother and she and her panel of partisans are the son.

To them, communicating with me is useless because I will continue to stubbornly believe in my "Chinese medicine". So there they are, standing one side with arms folded and telling me "You ask yourself why we withdraw from you lo", "You ask yourself why we like that lo" all the while refusing proper communication.

Whether I budge or not in my stand toward what they have to say is immaterial, what matters is they communicate what they have to say amicably.

The act of bringing the mum to the hospital can be allegorized as COMMUNICATION.

Whether I take in what you have to say or not is immaterial, your responsibility as a friend is to tell me what you think is right.

Folded arms and nonchalant rhetoric is not gonna benefit anyone or solve anything. And this is precisely what they're doing.

Is the act of communicating that hard? If I "void" all your perspectives, doesn't it mean that I AM TAKING TIME TO CONSIDER THEM AND "VOIDING" THEM?

I'm not like that Chinese mother who simply "voided" the "western" medicine without thought - I'm here, breaking down and analyzing your thoughts and seeing the truth and untruths in them.

Nonetheless, all I have to say is, as peoples, leaders, our responsibility is to stand and be a voice for what we believe in whether we are heard or not.

William Wilberforce stood against slave trade for 20 over years. BUT, slavery was never abolished in his lifetime. Only after he died - a month later - then were there laws passed and the slaves emancipated.

Not just him, but many other leaders in history have stood for what they believe in, even to the point of death. And sometimes, the change never did come.

My point is, instead of being that pathetic son who resorted to "See what your logic has caused you!" or "He's not gonna listen anyway" and did nothing, be that William Wilberforce and countless other leaders who spoke for what they believed in, IN SPITE OF whether they were heard or not.

Your responsibility here is not to care whether you're heard or not, your responsibility is to speak, TO COMMUNICATE what you think is true.

So to tell me "You figure out why we are treating you like that lor" is to breach this communication principle which I hold fast to.

In case your memory fails you, I've already considered the reasons why you guys would've resorted to this hands-off approach (mentioned above). It's due to my "Self-righteous tone" and "Storm-bringer" tendencies mentioned in the "My Mistakes" section earlier.

So I really do understand why you are doing that. I do have a part to play in your response toward me as well...DUH.

But the other half of the story is this - are you just gonna be that son? Or be William Wilberforce?

The other reason for not communicating is probably due to the "distance" concept.

To distance from a person to give that person space to think, breathe and consider - which I also believe in and which I'm exercising in a few of my relationships.

The thing is, the "distance" thing only works if it is first COMMUNICATED to the person by telling him/her "Hey, I think it's best that we distance for now so that we can have some breathing space to think things through. Because being with you is not helping. It's just, frustrating and entangling and I can't think properly when you're here."

So when this is communicated, the other person can accept it and from there exercise the concept of "distance" too.

For my case however, no such arrangements were made. There was just a sudden, cold withdrawal of friends or rather, Xuan-partisans without prior information. This is more a "hurting" concept than a "distance" concept.

Imagine your father suddenly walk out on the family without explanation. What'd be the thoughts running through your head?

If your father walked out on the family BUT LEFT A NOTE saying "I just need a break from you guys to clear my head over ___ things and issues. I'll be back soon." or something like that, it wouldn't be as hurting.

So ensuring that the "distance" concept is put into play is vital to making it work. If not, it'll just be an irresponsible walk out.

And yes, I must learn to be more patient too in the way you guys choose to do things. You're probably planning to meet me or clarify things properly or something.

But yeah, for now, I'll ask what I need to ask, say what I need to say and remain true to myself and honest to you.

Remember that questions and justifications does not nullify the apology or the course of action that I will be taking.

Conclusion

I am sorry for causing you guys to treat me like that. I guess I am not that easy a person to communicate with either. But really, all those "voiding" moments are my attempts to make sense of what you have to tell me.

难道 I have to accept everything you have to say to me without question? That's not gonna work either. Then I'll just be blindly swallowing your conclusions unchecked.

This whole time, I've stayed true to my communication principles if not verbally but in form of writing. I hope you see that. If you feel I really did not, then please show me where I have erred.

I hope I've made clear these things:

1) My apology
2) My questions
3) My justifications

These are all a package deal. You can't just take one without the other. I've to stay true to myself. I can't just say "sorry" and disregard all the questions I have.

So I hope you can digest this all properly. It took me days to write and in order for you to not take my post the wrong way, I suggest you read it again and again because I took pains to make clear many things.

It's normal to miss things when we read. That's why we can read our textbooks a thousand times and still not score full marks in the exam.

Yup, you've seen my conclusion in my previous post and that conclusion still stands.

I also hope you took the time to listen to those 2 songs which I shared in my previous post. Because that's what He's been dropping in me.

Lastly, after all these, what I am going to do is not to harp on these, but to extend my hand of apology and reconciliation.

I actually already did, many times, but thanks to your reaction to my thoughts, the apology was intercepted.

Nevertheless, I will apologize again and I will re-affirm my love for you guys.

Ultimately, we're all humans, we sin, we err, we all need God and His love to lubricate and straighten out our crooked ways.

All I want to do now is apologize, love and move on. Things may never be the same after this, but I hope we'll continue learning how to love and handle such situations amicably.

The fault was never 100% mine and never 100% yours. If we can come to a place of reconciliation and change, that'll be the day we've outgrown ourselves.

And I'll definitely be heading that direction.

In case you ever forget, I love you. I know it's been said a million times. But I'll never grow tired of saying this because we all need this so much - love.

For all we've shared and experienced together, I'll always love you. I can't undo my love for you all already. You all have a special place in my heart. You're all too dear not to love already.

You can become the most sinister criminal or even the Anti-Christ but you know what? I'll always love you. I may oppose your cause or distance from you or stay away from you, but there's one thing that won't change - our history.

And for our past, our love will stand. If they sound like empty words to you, test them.

I hope after all these you'll see the consistency of my love and principles. That I did not falter for the things that really matter.

Lemme end of with this verse of Scripture:

"Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins."

1 Peter 4:8