SingTel iPhone Users 1st Month Bill - One Is Charged Over $1600 For Mobile Data Usage
Sep 25, 2008 Gossips, Money, Singapore, Stupid Stuffs
Your guess how much? Like what the title of the old mandarin song by 张清芳, “激情过后” stated, after the the passionate period, excitement, it is time now to face the reality.
Source (This is the discussion thread on iPhone bill in HWZ, lots of “surprise there…)
I hope, that is just cock-up from the service provider. If not, the users get pwned big time……
I Guess Lots Of Bloggers Will Be Talking About “Sun Tan” Soon
Sep 25, 2008 Gossips, Scandals, Singapore, Stupid Stuffs
Since the Singapore national tabloid finally “verified the credibility” of the news and published it today. I think the whole nation will be talking about “Sun Tan”, and Google for “Sun Tan” as well.
But it is really kind of slow. “The source” (I believe there is only 1 source, which is that particular blog, but well, the videos are all over various pron sites now) posted the very 1st post about “Sun Tan” on 14th Sept 2008. Actually it is an interesting story. The author of the blog receive an email in his unpublished email address, informing him about this “Singaporean Exhibitionist Blogger Sun Tan Sex Photos and Naked Outside”, together with the video and photos. The informer is nicked “Hotel69″. After the author published it, he received another email in the same mailbox from the same email address as “Hotel69″. But this time is an warning letter from “Sun Tan” herself. “Sun Tan” warned him that she has already lodged a police report, and requesting him to take down all the photos. The author was never frightened (1 thing is he is never based in Singapore…). So he published another 2 posts about “Sun Tan”, together with other photos and sex videos that he found. Then, he received email from “Sun Tan” again, apologizing to him and explaining what’s happening. “Sun Tan” claimed that “Hotel69″ was her ex-boyfriend……
Exciting right? How about the sex videos? Nothing much to shout about. Except that you die die want to see her face, if not, don’t waste your time and bandwidth downloading it.
The links to the blog which exposed “Sun Tan”? As usual, Google is your best friend.
Tags: exhibitionist, gossip, Hotel69, scandal, sex tape, Singapore, Singaporean Exhibitionist Blogger Sun Tan Sex Photos an, Sun Tan
Peeping Tom Enjoyed Show, Took Video, Posted On STOMP
Sep 22, 2008 Scandals, Singapore, Stupid Stuffs
Buay tahan, buay taha, never see such cheapo people before.
A STOMPer and his wife were shocked to come across what appeared to look like a couple engaging in sexual acts, at West Coast Park.
In an email to STOMP today (22 Sept), the STOMPer says:
“My wife and I were surprised to find this couple making love in a public place.
“In the video, you can see the girl removing her panties and sitting on the man. This happened yesterday (21 Sept) at West Coast Park at around 10pm.
“I have seen some other couples kissing in this area before. Can they don’t do this in a public place?”
Oh come on, if you are so concerned, call police on the spot, let police settle with them! Now you are just a peeping tom to me, a cheapo peeping tom some more! You peepep people in their intimacy action (though it was in public), you took video, and you posted the video on a website that is open to the whole nation. What do you actually want? Compliments to you being so “righteous”, so “decent”?
To add on, please, change your video phone or buy a better video cam if your are into voyeur. We just couldn’t see a crap from your so called “video of couple making love in park”.
Anyone can see the “girl removing her panties”?
Tags: making out, sex, Stomp, stupid
Bikini Car Wash In Singapore?
Sep 22, 2008 Sexy, Singapore, Stupid Stuffs
Saw this on STOMP:
Source
There is really bikini car wash in Singapore? Really got bikini babes washing cars?
He Is Not Happy Because New Born Daughter’s Birth Cert Number Includes “444″
Sep 21, 2008 Funny News, Gossips, Singapore, Stupid Stuffs
Joseph and wife just got their daughter. But they are not happy because her birth cert number was issued with “444″ in between. He went ICA to appeal, failed. So he wrote in ST Forum to complain…
Baby’s birth cert reverses parental joy
THE arrival of my newborn daughter was a source of joy for my wife and myself - until I went to obtain her birth certificate from the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA).To my horror, she was given the number T08-XX444X. As Chinese Singaporeans are aware, the number four suggests death, and implies misfortune.
I appealed to the ICA officer, also a Chinese Singaporean who understood my discomfiture. But she firmly rejected my plea because rules were rules, I was told. Subsequently, I appealed to a superior officer and waited an agonising week, making several calls in between, only to be given the same answer.
I grant that sticking to a system of rules is important. But so too is crafting exceptions which humanise the system.
My wife and I took great pains to craft our daughter’s name, consulting time-honoured cultural principles, because we wanted an auspicious life for her. Imagine having a birth certificate number like 444 which counters all that.
A birth certificate is a personal and important life-long document.
A system which forces officers to stick rigidly to the rulebook without due regard for cultural sensitivities is not a good one. Rules are made to serve citizens and not the other way round.
I’m not giving up. I hope that my daughter can be given a more appropriate birth certificate number and I’m not asking for very auspicious figures.
Joseph Tan
Joseph ah Joseph, your daughter’s destiny is not decided by what birth cert number she was given (I could not remember when I last used my birth cert for anything). It is decided by what values, mindsets, virtues you teach her, pass down to her. But, I think he life will be quite tough in the future since he got a father like you.
Tags: birth cert, ST Forum, whinning
SMRT’s Brilliant Reply To STOMPer
Sep 20, 2008 Funny News, Singapore, Stupid Stuffs
Hey hey hey guys, other than the “hanky panky students at playground“, I also found something funny from STOMP today. First read the following:
A STOMPer was relieved he was not taking bus no. 61 when he saw that it would take 91 min to arrive.“The bus notification board stated that it would be 91 min for bus no. 61 to arrive.
“It went from 95 min, to 93 min and then to 91 min when I snapped this picture.
“Luckily I was not waiting for this bus, if not I would have waited for so long.”
Source
SMRT reacted, after 2 weeks. Read the reply to STOMP:
SMRT has reponded to a STOMPer’s queries on a bus service, which, according to the digital timetable at the bus stop, was scheduled to take 91 minutes to arrive at the Clarke Quay station.
In their response, an SMRT spokesperson says:
“I refer to the STOMP post on the arrival time of Service 61 displayed at the bus stop outside Clarke Quay Station (3 September).
“Service 61 has an average frequency of between 7 and 11 minutes from 5.30am to 8.30am on weekdays.
“Based on the information provided and from our investigation, this photograph of the real-time bus arrival information display at the bus stop outside Clarke Quay Station was likely to have been taken at about 5am.
“The real-time bus arrival information then would show 91 minutes as Service 61 begins operation from Bukit Batok Interchange at 5.30am and would reach the bus stop outside Clarke Quay Station at about 6.30am.
We would appreciate if STOMP could share this with its audience.”
Clarke Quay Station was not mentioned in the original post. Maybe the STOMPer did mention the location in his email, just that it wasn’t included in the post. But it doesn’t matter. What amuses me is, SMRT can come up with the conclusion that “the photo was likely taken at about 5am”. They based it on the frequency, the traveling time taken for bus to reach Clarke Quay Station bus stop from its starting point. That’s “logical”. But, did they notice also, what other information is shown on the photo?
Let’s see. The photo shows Bus 33, arriving in 13 minutes. OK, let’s go to SBS Transit site. From there, it shows that 33 travels between Bedok Interchange and Kent Ridge Terrace Interchange. Starts from Kent Ridge, bus stop at Clarke Quay is at stage 16.5.
Using IRIS, I checked the travelling time from Kent Ridge to Clarke Quay.
Bus 33 takes about 44 minutes to reach Clarke Quay. The photos shows that the bus would arrive in 13 minutes time, it means the bus left the interchange about 30 minutes before that. And it means what? Bus 33 left interchange at 430am? But what did SBS schedule show? The earliest bus is 545am, even on week days!
I seriously feel that the people are just anyhow bluffing, finding excuses, bull-shiting. And who is so free to wait for bus at 5am in the morning at CLARKE QUAY STATION? Just finish clubbing, take bus home is it?
Tags: SBS Transit, Singapore, SMRT, Stomp, STOMPer
