• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Members are encouraged to install GOM or HOLA or TUNNELBEAR for an added layer of protection.

    The SEX forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Really need help from bros here to fight NCC thugs in Wiki War erupting there...

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#1
Hello bros,

Really need your help to deal with these NCC thugs. I'm currently in constant battle with NCC thugs for few days now. After mediation from wiki editors, the following paras were finally allowed. Now, the NCC thugs want to remove the word "However" below to delink the 2 paras. My position was that the 2 paras are linked cause it shows that Joseph Prince has not been very forthcoming about his receiving of high pay (see below).

Everytime I add back the word "However", they remove it. They are also lobbying the wiki editors to take their position that these 2 paras are not linked by arguing that Prince's salary isn't $50K a month but less. These NCC fellas are really snake... call themselves Christians some more!

Bros, if you have time, pls sign up wiki and log on. You can edit the entry too... I can't be on wiki 24 hours a day but looks like their NCC people are on it all the time... need help from you guys to join in the battle... thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Prince#Senior_pastor_Joseph_Prince</SUP>

There have been criticisms about the quantum of salary paid by the church to its senor pastor Joseph Prince. On 5 October 2008, in an interview with the Sunday Times, Joseph Prince acknowledged that he was well-paid but added that money did not have a hold on him. Mr Prince who is the executive chairman of the church council, also dismissed the rumour in the interview that his salary was $50,000 a month, saying "It could have been $50,000 if I had not voluntarily taken all the pay cuts through the years. There was a system of payment that would actually enrich me greatly but as the church grew, I refuse to accept that system of payment."<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-news1_8-1>[9]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-news2_9-1>[10]</SUP>

However, on 30 March 2009, The Straits Times reported that a check revealed that the independent New Creation Church paid one employee between $500,001 and $550,000 in its last financial year of 2008. Under the revised and updated recommendations contained in the Code of Governance <SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-code1_17-1>[18]</SUP> for charities, all charities and non-profit organizations in Singapore are encouraged to disclose the salary bands of their top executives to the Commissioner of Charities. Even though the church did not confirm if the amount went to its pastor, Joseph Prince, but it told The Straits Times that its policy is to 'recognise and reward key contributors to the church and Senior Pastor Prince is the main pillar of our church's growth and revenue'.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-news3_16-1>[17]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-27>[28]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-28>[29]</SUP>
 
Last edited:

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#2
[COLOR=_______]Comments made by NCC people (Tanlipkee is some kind of brainwashed leader in NCC) in wiki discussion board on the Joseph Prince entry:[/COLOR]

As for the question regarding the appropriateness of using the adverb "however" to link the two paragraphs in question, the relevant question to ask is: is there any factual contradiction between what Pastor told the press about his salary (that he was not paid a monthly salary of $50,000) and the actual amount reported (that the annual salary was in the range of $500,001 to $550,000, which worked out to be a monthly salary of $45,833 or less)? If there is no contradiction, then according to the normal usage of the language, the adverb "however" should not be used to link the two paragraphs.Tanlipkee (talk) 17:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to further clarify about point 1 above, if we were to assume: (a) the highest amount of SGD550,000 (based on the range of SGD500,001 to SGD550,000 cited by the press) for Joseph Prince, and (b) the full year salary included the minimum of a one-month bonus element (which is normally the case here in Singapore), then the Joseph Prince's monthly salary would have been: SGD550,000/13 months = SGD42,308 per month, which is lower than SGD50,000 per month. Even if we were to assume that no annual bonus was given out to Joseph Prince during the financial year in question, his monthly salary would have been: SGD550,000/12 months = SGD45,833 per month, which is still lower than SGD50,000 per month. Factually, there is no discrepancy between what Joseph Prince told the press about his monthly salary and what the press reported about his annual salary. In other words, there is no factual contraction between the content in the first two paragraphs under the sub-section "SGD500,000 annual salary paid to the pastor". Therefore, in my opinion, it is inappropriate to use the adverb "however" to link those two paragraphs. Tanlipkee (talk) 23:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#3
More of NCC's BS:

If there is any verifiable evidence available that can prove that Joseph Prince had told a lie about his salary to the press, please cite the source.

If the objective is to tell the readers that "people are questioning the intention of Prince", this may be done by stating so in the wiki article and providing the relevant source citation to support such a statement.

Wiki articles should be based on verifiable facts and/ or cited sources which are reliable, not on personal opinions (whether one person or many persons). I refer to wikipedia's guidelines on verifiability: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
I sincerely hope that we can all respect and follow wikipedia's guidelines.


The issue in our current discussion on the use of the word "however" here is NOT about people's opinions about the amount of the salary. The issue here is about whether the content of the two paragraphs in question are indeed factually discrepant.

If there is no factual contradiction between what Pastor told the press about his salary that he was not paid a monthly salary of $50,000 and the actual amount reported that the annual salary was in the range of $500,001 to $550,000 (or a monthly salary in the range of $38,462 (assuming a 13th month bonus) to $45,833 (assuming no 13th month bonus), then according to the normal usage of the language, the adverb "however" should not be used to link the two paragraphs.

Tanlipkee (talk) 17:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#4
More defence from NCC:

Regarding the use of the adverb "however", allow me to illustrate my point with a few examples as follows:

This sentence makes sense: On 3 March 2009, Jeslyn told me that she did not buy a $500 handbag. About a month later, on 5 April 2009, I found out from Jeslyn's credit card statement that the price of the handbag she bought was $423.


This sentence does NOT make sense: On 3 March 2009, Jeslyn told me that she did not buy a $500 handbag. However, about a month later, on 5 April 2009, I found out from Jeslyn's credit card statement that the price of the handbag she bought was $423.

This sentence makes sense: On 1 May 2009, it was reported in the Financial Times that ABC company had denied rumours that it will be retrenching 50,000 of its employees. On 3 June 2009, the Financial Times reported that ABC had retrenched 35,720 employees in the month of May 2009.

This sentence does NOT makes sense: On 1 May 2009, it was reported in the Financial Times that ABC company had denied rumours that it will be retrenching 50,000 of its employees. However, on 3 June May 2009, the Financial Times reported that ABC had retrenched 35,720 employees.
This sentence makes sense: On 10 April 2007, Mr Lee declared to the income tax authority that his annual income for the previous calendar year was less than $5 million. A year later later, on 10 April 2009, the tax authority reported that Mr Lee's annual income for the calendar year 2006 was in fact $4.6 million.

This sentence does NOT makes sense: On 10 April 2007, Mr Lee declared to the income tax authority that his annual income for the previous calendar year was less than $5 million. However, a year later later, on 10 April 2009, the tax authority reported that Mr Lee's annual income for the calendar year 2006 was in fact $4.6 million.

I hope the above examples prove helpful in explaining what I have been trying to say with regard to the appropriateness of the use of the adverb "however" to link the two paragraphs in question. Let's make the issue crystal clear, and not drag in other concerns and become confused over those other concerns, which I believe should be addressed elsewhere separately.121.6.190.104 (talk) 01:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Tanlipkee (talk) 01:14, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#6
I always view SBF and 3in1 from the same family. We're all from the old SBF... what's your problems bro? U support NCC is it?
 

blueblobster

Alfrescian
Loyal
#7
Hello bros,

Really need your help to deal with these NCC thugs. I'm currently in constant battle with NCC thugs for few days now. After mediation from wiki editors, the following paras were finally allowed. Now, the NCC thugs want to remove the word "However" below to delink the 2 paras. My position was that the 2 paras are linked cause it shows that Joseph Prince has not been very forthcoming about his receiving of high pay (see below).

Everytime I add back the word "However", they remove it. They are also lobbying the wiki editors to take their position that these 2 paras are not linked by arguing that Prince's salary isn't $50K a month but less. These NCC fellas are really snake... call themselves Christians some more!

Bros, if you have time, pls sign up wiki and log on. You can edit the entry too... I can't be on wiki 24 hours a day but looks like their NCC people are on it all the time... need help from you guys to join in the battle... thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Prince#Senior_pastor_Joseph_Prince</SUP>

There have been criticisms about the quantum of salary paid by the church to its senor pastor Joseph Prince. On 5 October 2008, in an interview with the Sunday Times, Joseph Prince acknowledged that he was well-paid but added that money did not have a hold on him. Mr Prince who is the executive chairman of the church council, also dismissed the rumour in the interview that his salary was $50,000 a month, saying "It could have been $50,000 if I had not voluntarily taken all the pay cuts through the years. There was a system of payment that would actually enrich me greatly but as the church grew, I refuse to accept that system of payment."<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-news1_8-1>[9]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-news2_9-1>[10]</SUP>

However, on 30 March 2009, The Straits Times reported that a check revealed that the independent New Creation Church paid one employee between $500,001 and $550,000 in its last financial year of 2008. Under the revised and updated recommendations contained in the Code of Governance <SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-code1_17-1>[18]</SUP> for charities, all charities and non-profit organizations in Singapore are encouraged to disclose the salary bands of their top executives to the Commissioner of Charities. Even though the church did not confirm if the amount went to its pastor, Joseph Prince, but it told The Straits Times that its policy is to 'recognise and reward key contributors to the church and Senior Pastor Prince is the main pillar of our church's growth and revenue'.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-news3_16-1>[17]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-27>[28]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-28>[29]</SUP>
Bro,

Their conduct already shows their true nature and by extension, Prince's. The way they justify that 50,000 lie is laughable and totally predictable. They are just playing with words to distort the truth.

But bro, you are wasting your time. The people there willingly asked to be brainwashed. How can you beat that? You can never defeat stupidity and ignorance.

Cheers.
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#8
The diff between 3in1 and SBF is over here we can fuck the host Sam Leong and still wont get ban! You cheebye 3in1 post commend there must need approval by you cheebye kia. Chee bye lah fuck back to your 3in1 let those fucker carry ur balls. Here you have to face the reality! Fuck your mother hard!:biggrin:
Bro, u mai tok cock leh. Want to tok cock also dont tok until like that lah... 3in1 where got ban people for fucking mods? Pls show proof where got say must need approval before posting.... dont anyhow tok cock lah...
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#9
Bro,

Their conduct already shows their true nature and by extension, Prince's. The way they justify that 50,000 lie is laughable and totally predictable. They are just playing with words to distort the truth.
Exactly! those buggers are playing with words and trying to fool the wiki editors... that's why I damn TULAN... call themselves Christian some more... They are now arguing that technically, Prince didnt like when he told the press that "HE DID NOT RECEIVE $50,000 (exactly)".... but KNN, even if he is receiving $49,999, he is still trying to cover up by denying the rumour. At $40-50K a month for a priest, it's already very excessive...
 

newyorker88

Alfrescian
Loyal
#11
Hello bros,


Bros, if you have time, pls sign up wiki and log on. You can edit the entry too... I can't be on wiki 24 hours a day but looks like their NCC people are on it all the time... need help from you guys to join in the battle... thanks.
I would like to quote what some brothers says " Never argue with an idiot, they will beat you hands down with experience and make you into one too".

NCC fellows? Let them be. One fine day, they will see it for themselves how stupid they are themselves.
 

Char_Azn

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
#12
I don't understand U guys are so upset over this. If those idiots are dumb enough to get con out of their money on a monthly basis to buy an idea which is most likely falses, I say let them
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#14
Nee nah bay chee bye lah!! My post all have to go thru for approval!! Chee bye kia! I just join want to g o in fuck u ppl! You very smart don't allow my post to go thru!! Chao chee bye!! Fuck you and ur free speech ! Go eat shit!!
So far, I only banned 1 guy after over 100,000+ postings in 3in1kopitiam. This is the guy who kept spamming the whole forum with pictures of e-Jay's head merged into a snake body. After a few of such postings, told him to stop. Instead of stopping, he kept up with it. Everyone in the forum got fed-up. You tell me lah... shouldn't I put him and his nicks on moderations?

Bro, search your own heart lah... if you got problem with e-Jay, don't take it out on forums by spamming. You are pissing off all the forumers...
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#15
I don't understand U guys are so upset over this. If those idiots are dumb enough to get con out of their money on a monthly basis to buy an idea which is most likely falses, I say let them
Bro, what if your younger brother, say only 17-18 years old kenna conned inside and donated all his personal savings of few thousands of dollars to NCC? What are you going to do?
 

blueblobster

Alfrescian
Loyal
#17
>>>Exactly! those buggers are playing with words and trying to fool the wiki editors... that's why I damn TULAN... call themselves Christian some more... They are now arguing that technically, Prince didnt like when he told the press that "HE DID NOT RECEIVE $50,000 (exactly)".... but KNN, even if he is receiving $49,999, he is still trying to cover up by denying the rumour. At $40-50K a month for a priest, it's already very excessive...

Bro, I've been helping out whenever I can. Actually I have no issue with his pay. They can give him 5 million a month for all I care. Willing suckers, willing taker. I just don't like how he distorts the truth.

What is interesting is this. Prince preaches grace over law. Yet this time, he uses a legalistic loophole to escape on a technicality.
 

blueblobster

Alfrescian
Loyal
#18
>>>NCC fellows? Let them be. One fine day, they will see it for themselves how stupid they are themselves.

That's the problem. That day wil never come. They are totally brainwashed.
 

kojakbt

Alfrescian
Loyal
#20
Bro, I've been helping out whenever I can. Actually I have no issue with his pay. They can give him 5 million a month for all I care. Willing suckers, willing taker. I just don't like how he distorts the truth.

What is interesting is this. Prince preaches grace over law. Yet this time, he uses a legalistic loophole to escape on a technicality.
Hey bro, thx! We should all try to work together to expose this Prince fraudster. After some tussles, managed to get wiki editors to accept the 2 paras. Why I wrote those 2 paras in the first place is precisely wanting to expose the "lie" he is making.

You are right. If may be even be $5M salary. The key is, he denied receiving $50K per month salary knowing very well that the reporter was referring to the high salary he is receiving.

I like some bro who used this analogy in the wiki discussion page:

"I suspected that my staff stole $50,000 from me. He denied that he stole $50,000 from me and swore by it. I foolishly took his word for it. Later I found out that he was indeed telling me the truth. He did not steal $50,000 from me. However, he stole $45,000."

HAHA! Good analogy (was it u who wrote it?)
 
Top