By Augustine Low

Customers pay good money for good service. Does that mean there should be zero tolerance for anything gone wrong, even through unforeseen circumstance or honest mistake?

Take the recent SingTel fire which left customers without broadband, phone and pay TV services. The reaction was all too familiar – annoyance, then frustration and anger, followed by: I Want Compensation! And after compensation is announced: I Want More!

As Singapore grows more affluent, more mature, it is ironic that we could have a tendency to become more intolerant, more opportunistic. This leaves little room to take stock, to seek to understand rather than let the instinct of confronting and condemning kick in.

It’s interesting that corporations affected by the SingTel episode have reportedly said they are not seeking compensation. Perhaps they know what it’s like to be at the receiving end of an unforgiving public.

Of course, it cuts both ways. Corporations are also guilty of adopting a zero tolerance policy and turning a blind eye to reasonable customer requests. Inflexibility becomes the rule of thumb. But that’s another story, for another time.

I recall the parent (as told by a colleague) who marched to the principal’s office to kick up a big fuss, on discovering that the teacher had erred in deducting an additional mark off her daughter’s test paper.

I fear we are teaching our kids that every wrong, every mistake – no matter how small, how honest – must be punished. We may even go so far as to encourage milking a situation for what it’s worth, of exacting maximum mileage out of someone’s mistake or misfortune.

Earlier this year, McDonald’s held a Hello Kitty promotion which went awry. There was rampant queue jumping and when stocks ran out, tempers flared. Police had to be called in.

Contrast this to a video clip I saw two years ago but which remains etched in my mind. This was the aftermath of the Fukushima earthquake and tsunami when food supplies ran out and people had to queue for basic necessities at public distribution centres.

A Japanese man, after queuing for many hours, was told that there was nothing left for him. He bowed and walked off. No questions asked, no hue and cry.

He bowed, I think, to show his acceptance and understanding that people were doing their best under very trying conditions, and that no one was to blame.

Will we ever attain such a level of graciousness?

If we get all worked up over Hello Kitty, test paper and broadband service, how would we react on an empty stomach, in times of crisis?

Augustine Low is a communications strategist.

By Tang Li
I know it’s not politically correct to admit it … but I love Geylang, Singapore’s red-light district. Geylang stands out as an example of how to contain and control the worst in human kind into a workable system. What’s more remarkable about Geylang is the fact that it exists and flourishes in a country that once banned tourists with long hair.
Geylang owes its existence to Singapore’s founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. In his biography, From Third World to First, Mr Lee stated quite clearly that trying to eradicate the business would be futile and it was better to have the business out in the open where the state could manage it. This has allowed Singapore to contain the vice trade in a manner that was best described by a friend as being “keeping the unclean things clean”.
What makes Geylang work? Well, for a start, it could be the fact that everyone in the system seems to know the basic rules. As long as the basic rules are maintained, everyone is allowed to do business as usual.
There is a police presence in Geylang. Visit the area on any given night and one will inevitably find a police van parked in one corner and one will also see a couple of policemen walking or driving around. Plainclothes policemen from the anti-vice department are also known to mingle around the area once in a while.
Whenever the police are there, the operators of illegal gambling tables and DVD salesmen make themselves scarce. The girls who normally ply their trade on the streets sit by the coffee shop until the police walk away.
The basic rule in Geylang is that disputes must be resolved without violence. Violence brings in the police and that’s bad for everyone’s business.
The second rule that’s kept Geylang going is the fact that prostitution is not illegal in Singapore. As long as a woman is of an age where she can provide consent, there’s nothing to stop her from working as a prostitute. Theoretically this means that prostitutes and those who deal with prostitutes are governed by the same laws as everyone else. Unlike the situation in many American cities, prostitutes are not placed in a situation where they are fearful of going to the law if they need to.
Other than these two facts, people are allowed to do what they want to do. While sex and gambling are the main pillars,  Geylang is an entrepreneurial hive. The place is filled with small shops that support the needs of the residents.
Food stalls are prominent. Connoisseurs in search of hawker food can look forward to Geylang’s beef kway teow and bean curd.
Geylang is also filled with places where one can pick up good deals on computers and phones.
Those who visit Geylang are mainly foreigners. They need to stay in touch with friends and family back home. Shops to provide them with everything from phones, tablets, phone cards to cheap phone calls have sprung up.
What I have said here is just a teaser. Many more activities go on there. It deserves a deeper study that can include entrepreneurship, survival instincts, foodie haunts and, of course, how Singapore has managed to control the area with that famous light touch.

By Zach Isaiah Chiah