Consultant Wrote Long Post About SSPH Flaws But Some Netizens Think He’s Humblebragging

Whenever a new writer joins Goody Feed, our editor would tell him or her this:

“Write with simple words and short sentences. Use the simplest English ever; so simple, even a primary school student would be able to understand. Don’t ever use big words, and don’t ever use the passive voice.”

Most of the times, the writer would stand up and say, “But people would think that my English is lousy and that I’m an idiot!”

To which, our editor would also stand up, look at him or her in the eyes deeply and whispered, “You are an idiot.”

That’s why our turnover rate is so high.

The logic behind this policy is simple: other than improving readability, people tend to associate “simple English” with “BFFs”, and “chim + scholarly-styled English” with “teachers”.

Here at Goody Feed, we want to be your BFF and not your teacher. We want you to read our articles instead of you to be impressed with our articles.

So when a person uses phrases like “basing on prima facie analysis” or “infuriated by the press conference”, you can bet that either the essay is used for a PhD thesis or the writer is Amos Yee.

Or maybe something else.

Lengthy Post About the “Dangers” of SSPH in Facebook Garnered 5.5K Shares

I bet you’d think that finally, a fellow technician has come out and explained the mechanics of how the SSPH works, and why there’s a flaw in the design right from the beginning.

But no: strangely enough, despite the SAF having numerous Army Techs, they’ve all remain silent.

Instead, this lengthy post is by a person who “served in Control of Personnel Centre.”

I also don’t know. Got this battalion one? 1, 3, 6 or 9? Active or non-active?

Actually…SAF or not SAF?

We’re not going to include the name and profile for obvious reasons, so we’re going to call him BCE, because according to his profile, he’s the first Singaporean author on Blockchain, so he might be a Blockchain Expert.

But anyways.

According to his introduction, during his NS period, he received awards “for productivity and process improvements signed by the then Chief of Army and also Dr Yeo Ning Hong.”

Pretty sure it’s not just another USMS.

Moving on, he introduced himself as a “Practising Management Consultant certified by a Board closely related to the government.” He designs management and operations system for companies, and these principles are supposedly similar to the design of tanks.

He looks at the design of the SSPH and thinks that it’s a dangerous vehicle, and then provides premises for his argument:

• Space that the late Aloysius Pang was in should never be occupied at all, and if really necessary, it should be blocked off and accessed only during repairs (you don’t say?)
• When the gun is firing, there should be a recoil, so it’s common sense that the area is blocked off except during maintenance (you don’t say X 2?)
• When someone is repairing, he or she should have the full control

He then explained that this whole incident is totally avoidable.

In addition, he also mentioned about Deming Principle. The only Deming I know is my primary school friend who’s now a PE teacher reporting to a principal.

Some People Agree, But Some People Think He’s Humblebragging

So, there are some netizens who agree with his prima facie analysis.

And of course you’re here for comments like these:

You can decide on whether you want to read the full post by him here.

Or maybe you can watch this video we’ve done about humblebragging instead.

Lest you’re still not familiar with humblebragging, you can read this article on the eight facts about humble-bragging.