[starbugstk]

Everyone makes mistakes from time to time, be it a typo, a factual error or just an oversight. I made the mistake of stating Ann Kok's acting career had taken off in the '80s when in fact it began in the '90s. I gleaned the erroneous info from a Chinese entertainment website which I'm now not able to recall and retrieve. If I had read the 8th post of this thread that conspicuously shows the real commencement period of Ann's career, I wouldn't have come to grief. That's what comes from not checking my post thoroughly.

When you write a lot, you tend to make a mistake or two, but I think this isn't a big issue in forum talking shop. It's helluva big issue when it's going for publication. Mine was a simple oversight, but you made a big thing out of it, as if it was a malicious distortion of the fact, but in point of fact it was an unintentional distortion of the length of Ann's career - from 30 years to 40 years or thereabouts.

You said the "10-year untruth" would be buried in the ground of falsehood. Nay, it won't be dead and buried just yet as it is still standing tall for all to see in post 8. I cannot thank Oyk enough for pointing out my mistake. It's against our principles to ignore or cover up each other mistakes. When we made a mistake, we jolly well own up to it. This goes to show that he's a principled person. I made a simple mistake, but I'm sure that didn't take away from my overall, well-thought-out essay written in good faith.

Knnbccb just as I expected unable to recall which entertainment website the erroneous info was from so unable to retrieve to show the general public here.
I would have given you the benefits of the doubt if was 3 weeks or 3 months ago but it was only 3 days ago and you conveniently forget.

Come on want to lie must also have some common sense lah knnccb!
Don't give us the same crap "Everyone makes mistakes from time to time, be it a typo, a factual error or just an oversight" The same excuses used by Schroder in the HC episode in which you defended him vigorously with full details years after that forum was closed. That you can remember! Knnbccb!

You could also remember so vividly what transpired between your wife and those Chinese staff in your trip to Mainland China which I believe was many months ago but you couldn't remember the website you visited 3 days ago to substatiate what you have said.
In the court of justice do you think the prosecutor will not exploit on that?

Knnbccb just admit you fabricated it and you will be forgiven, move on from there but you are using all your power and might in writng to defend your lie and implying I made a big thing out of it. Knnbccb that's what you are good in, persuasive writing to garner reader's support.

This is not about a simple oversight or I created a storm in a teacup. It is about your honesty and integrity.

S I M T A N Wrote:
My bad! I gathered this erroneous piece of info from an entertainment site

You lied didn't you? Knnbccb!

NB: Thank you Oyk for picking up this inconsequential and insignificant error
which lead to a momentous discovery.

While flipping the pages of an entertainment site, I chanced upon an article about Mediacorp artist Ann Kok. What caught my attention was her incredibly long acting career which reportedly began in the '80s. I made a mental note of it among other things. That was on the 7th of this month, a day before Bigiron started this interesting thread. On the 17th, Oyk pointed out my biff. The time lapse between the 7th and the 17th was definitely more than the 3 days you said. With many calls on my time, I don't usually spend much time reading and forumming each day, and I'm not very good at retrieving data.

I didn't blame the erroneous information as you said I did; I only have myself to blame - for not double-checking my post before clicking the post reply button. Yes, the whole effing thing has turned out to be a tempest in a teapot, to borrow your words. You're indeed making a big fuss over nothing, or rather over a simple oversight, dragging the court into this and throwing questions of honesty and personal integrity at me.

If a judge were to make a decision on this case, he'll probably ask you, "What did the defendant stand to gain by fabricating the fact that was already staring readers in the face? To sensationalize the story so that it would sell sensationally well?" You say, "But my Honour, he was also trying to impress or crush people with his brand of powerful English." Judge: "Well if that's the case, I suggest you start enrolling yourself in an advanced course in English in order to achieve a high level of proficiency in English so that you can do better than him with your own brand of powerful English. I rest my case."

Knn why there is a need to explain, illustrate and even throw in an imagination on what a judge says?
It sure takes a lot of efforts in covering a lie isn't it?
Just because something isn't a lie does not mean that it isn't deceptive. Nothing tastes more bitter than the truth right? Knn.