Improve productivity? Then value engineers

I have no idea what this thing does, but it's a pic from ABCO’s Advanced Systems

I have no idea what this thing does, but it’s a pic from ABCO’s Advanced Systems

There’s an article by Toh Yong Chuan in the Straits Times 31 October 2013, titled “The difference a soup ladle makes” discussing his observations as to how Japanese restaurants continuously improve productivity. The soup ladle of the headline  was one he saw at restaurant chain Yoshinoya’s training school.

During my visit, a trainer explained that the ladles used to scoop up the beef portions at all its restaurants have 47 holes each. The holes are designed to allow just the right amount of gravy to flow into the rice.

The ladles come in two lengths – one about 30cm, the other some 10cm longer. The reason: a taller person can use the longer ladle without having to bend his back

– Straits Times, 31 Oct 2013, The difference a soup ladle makes, by Toh Yong Chuan

He also wrote about the coming demise of the conveyor belt sushi restaurant. Applying information technology as gateway to mass customisation,

Diners punch in orders on iPads. Sushi is delivered to tables or bar counters on compact disk-sized trays that run on tracks. Customers pick up their orders and push a button which sends the trays back to the kitchen.

This cuts down wastage since food is prepared according to orders. In a conveyor belt system, sushi is prepared in anticipation of demand. Items not picked up are discarded after some time.

– ibid.

Since orders are captured electronically, the absurdly low-tech practice (which we see in all conveyor belt restaurants) where a server has to be summoned to come count your coloured plates, can be dispensed with.

I found the article thought-provoking, but also quite depressing. I can’t see Singapore businesses following in these footsteps anytime soon.

By that, I don’t mean buying the technology and the machines that the Japanese have invented, I mean following the footsteps of inventiveness. For a country, the value-add in inventing something new and selling it to the world is naturally much greater than the value-add of buying somebody else’s machines and saving a few workers in a handful of domestic businesses.

What will it take to emulate such management attitudes and to realise ideas? I think it needs an overhaul of management attitudes, a rising number of engineers at the core of businesses, and vitally, a cosmos of supporting industries that can design, programme and manufacture unique machines.  I think all three are lacking in Singapore.

Engineering-minded management and shortage of engineers

Management has to approach their business processes with an engineering frame of mind, constantly looking for ways to make small improvements and ironing out kinks. However, I have a suspicion that Singapore doesn’t produce enough engineers. Quite often, when I meet an engineer, I meet a foreigner. My guess is that for too long, it’s been seen as a non-white colour career, more “technician” than “professional”. For too many Singaporeans, engineering is not in the same league as medicine or law. So now, when business owners and managers don’t have engineering-like analytical skills, and without engineers at the core of their organisations, business process improvement is very difficult to pull off.

Some things you can organise by moving people around or redefining job tasks, but if the aim is to make a substantial leap in productivity, ultimately one will have to start asking oneself, “how can such-and-such be achieved without humans at all?”  I very much doubt if anyone can find an answer to such a question in most businesses without considerable involvement of engineers.

Consider this:

Suppose a client needs a machine that makes prata, one that can replicate the dexterity of human hands. Clearly, the machine has to have sensors that can detect the edge of the dough, and moving parts that grip, flip and fold. Then it needs to be placed on a hotplate for a defined period to cook it, while being basted with butter ghee.

And I’ll say this only half in jest: We better have such a machine real soon before the present generation of prata makers die out and prata becomes haute cuisine (due to rarity) that costs $45 each. Or else we’ll have to keep importing “foreign talent” to knead dough and flip the flatbread.

Of course, the machine doesn’t have to perform with this level of showmanship:

And why are we still washing dishes by hand in countless food courts in Singapore?

Nor does invention, with the aim of reducing labour use, have to be restricted to food businesses. Can we please have a machine that will custom tailor shirts and trousers for me, after I have punched in my unflattering measurements? Think about it.  When we go to a custom tailor, he takes about 12 – 15 measurements and a few days later a shirt or a pair of trousers come out. The persons who cut and sew obviously work to a template in the backroom. Isn’t this ripe for automation?

Shoes may be a bit harder, but in principle not different from shirts and trousers.

How about a machine that can do gift-wrapping? Or a haircut robot — at least for men’s short styles — which I’m pretty sure isn’t that hard with present day technology.

Need an ecology

However, beware of pipe-dreams.

More crucially, even if some smart guys think up new machines or quasi-robot solutions, who will make them? There’s a whole industry that is needed; for want of a better name, I’ll call it micro-manufacturing. In my mind’s eye, they’re a collection of small, typically family-run, firms that care a lot about quality. They cast metal objects to custom shapes, they lathe with precision, they design and implant electronic circuits that are one of a kind, which are linked to algorithms specially worked out for particular processes. These companies make prototypes and then improve the prototypes until they have a reliable breakthrough product. But they do this in collaboration with clients who need never-invented-before machines, and with a host of other quality-minded firms that supply parts (including custom-made parts) and components. For example, if a proposed new machine needs a special kind of glass with specific properties made to a predefined shape, where in Singapore would one find such a component supplier?

It’s a known fact in economics that having an ecology of interlocking businesses and technologies geographically close to each other (for better collaboration and exchange of test-parts) produces immense competitive advantage that is hard for others to duplicate. German and Japanese prowess in engineering is well known — and the Japanese are also moving ahead marrying that base with robotic technology. What is illuminative is that their strengths come from having a myriad of small specialist firms. In the long run, I reckon it will stand these countries in far better stead, because they create knowledge rather than extract rent. Certainly better than those countries which rely on financial wizardry, tourism (and gambling), construction, real estate and ever larger pools of cheap labour to drive their economies. Oops, does that sound like us?

Catching up or wasting money?

To be fair, our policy-makers may (at last) have come to a similar conclusion. The Singapore University of Technology and Design is starting up, though it may take 20 years before, with any luck, their graduates are experienced and good enough to show results (if ever). More importantly, will these graduates want to work in safe jobs in big companies? How many will become entrepreneurs creating start-ups that grow into specialist, quality-obsessed firms?

And then the question: where are the client firms? Where are the managers that are driven to look for ways to automate and reinvent their business processes, and which provide the demand for the hoped-for specialist engineering firms to thrive?

We are still doing things piecemeal. We need to break up some government-owned monoliths and the huge property companies that drive rents up by their lock on commercial and industrial properties, and tilt the playing field in favour of small businesses. Otherwise what we’re investing in producing engineers will be wasted because the environment is not conducive.

Ending on a down-note

As I mentioned above, I am not even sure that we’re at the starting gate. In my view, managements of small businesses in Singapore (generally speaking, of course) still do not understand the crucial importance of continuous process improvement, without which we can forget about automation. I have no sorrier tale of this attitude problem than of the “Chinese mixed rice” stall at Plaza Singapura’s food court on the 6th floor.

It does many things right, but in my view, the business is dying, because it doesn’t even realise it is doing one thing wrong — one thing that is ridiculously easy to fix. It doesn’t even have to involve bringing in engineers and designing custom-made machines!

In the early part of the evening, the stall has a wide selection of dishes. The cooks are okay; I have never had a problem with their cooking. But after 7 pm, while many other stalls in the food court are still as busy as ever, their custom falls off rapidly. Why? Because their buffet of dishes has gone cold.

They can easily solve this by installing heaters on the counter to keep the buffet warm. Or they can purchase a few microwave ovens to heat up customers’ plates after they have picked their toppings over rice.

I am sure that I am not the only customer who has been disappointed in being served cold food. The fact that their sales crash after 7 pm or 7:30 pm suggests that many others have learnt to avoid them. The amazing thing is that neither the staff nor management seem to be aware that they have this major, major failing in customer service. Nobody in all these years has bothered to enquire.

How do we get any kind of improvement, productivity- or automation-wise, if there’s no drive to do better?

29 Responses to “Improve productivity? Then value engineers”


  1. 1 questioning 1 November 2013 at 02:24

    i tried to share such thoughts on productivity and efficiency, and a friend said it would mean a loss of jobs. i said they could go do other jobs where they’d be appreciated. the friend leapt at my throat for suggesting that it such jobs should be done away with and not worth keeping. i’m not sure what the criticism was finally about, but it got me thinking that there are still people who think that menial jobs should remain available because there will be people who need them, and that any job that pays and puts food on the table is valuable, no matter whether people appreciate the people providing the service or not. are we perhaps already thinking that many people simply do not think in such engineering, creative or entrepreneuring ways, and people are still thinking of having jobs? but what does the world you envision really look like? can everything be automated or overcome by technology? or is it just an eternal chase?

    • 2 Yewey 6 November 2013 at 09:24

      Preserving menial jobs because there are people who need them may sound like a noble idea. After all, there are a lot of uneducated and old people who can’t do much but still need the job to feed themselves. Unfortunately, nowadays most of these menial jobs go to cheaper foreign workers than the people who really need them.

  2. 3 yuen 1 November 2013 at 03:11

    when I started teaching in NUS computer science in 83, the dept attracted top students, including female students; a decline became noticeable in early 90s with females falling away first then males; there was a brief revival during the dotcom boom but the trend then resumed; a similar decline trend was noticed in engineering a little later; today tech degree popularity remains well below that of medicine, law, business, probably also arts

    I presume this reflects a perception of the status of tech personnel in organizations and in society generally; while starting salaries of tech degree holders might be good relative to non-tech degrees, long term promotion prospects would seem to be poorer, and technical obsolescence is a constant threat; overall, students judge the ratio of effort required to obtain these degrees/potential rewards to be lower

    so I think your call to value engineers is well conceived; whether it would be well received is however a different question

  3. 4 harishpillay 1 November 2013 at 05:08

    I am an engineer and when I was in school, engineering was the most sought after program in the university/polytechnic. But today, that is no longer the case. It has become essentially the least desired one. I have written about this at my blog https://harishpillay.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/will-we-ever-have-engineers/. Just look at the requirements to do engineering at the poly. Last year, the last person who got into the program had a O level aggregate of 22. 22! But for the soft programs like “international business” it was 7! 7 vs 22. Really? Unbelievable. This is not unique to Singapore btw, but is a problem that will manifest in us not being able to make anything and us having people who want to sell something.

  4. 5 devil 1 November 2013 at 09:26

    SG does train enough engineers. It is just that engineering work is not desired enough. There are engineering jobs, but there are other non-engineering jobs that engineers can succeed in and earn more, e.g. in finance. As a result engineers either don’t work in engineering or move overseas where engineers are much more valued. I’m not sure how training more engineers will solve the problem…

  5. 6 Jacky 1 November 2013 at 09:54

    You are right. Engineers are not valued in Singapore. Many of my friends who graduated with engineering degree opt to do sales and marketing or insurance due to the much higher pay and better prospects. Engineering is dead. My friend told me if his son say he want to grow up and become an engineer, he would give him a tight slap.

    The PAP government has imported too many foreigners on S-pass and E-pass with dubious qualifications to take on engineering jobs so much so that it has cheapen the job into one that “Singaporeans do not want to do”.

    • 7 Jacky 1 November 2013 at 09:58

      To add further, companies like Capital Land, Frasers and SPH needs to be broken up. Too many going into property development. What happen to their core business? This government is supporting these Temasek or GIC-linked companies to earn easy money at the expense of its people. We have to stop this.

  6. 8 FC 1 November 2013 at 11:48

    I have learnt from painful experience that it is better to work with the best in the world rather than best in Singapore.

    If I needed a custom speciality component, I would engage with a Mittelstand company usually in German, Isreal, UK, Japan, Canada, United States,Holland, New Zealand or Australia. We discuss and engage with each other like they were located in Toa Payoh. Almost all have someone who is very fluent in English. The shipping takes a week from the West Coast of US. Not much different from Munich, Sydney, etc.

    The internet and Singapore’s connectivity to direct flights from key cities has really changed the game for micro-businesses like myself.

    Contrary to popular believe, we still have a very good range of supporting industries for prototyping and small runs in Singapore. This is mostly a result of passing waves of industry from the ship repair, marine conversion, oil/gas support, HHD, Printers and bio-medical. They, however, are not as healthy and thriving. There are big segments of these craft shops that do not seem to have a chance at generational renewal.

    IMHO, we are greatly contrained by craftsmen and makers not Engineers per se. Too many of our Engineers are employed shuffling paperwork and gardening “management systems” in bureacracies. My experience with makers is that music majors are not incapable of analytical thinking and programmers are not incapable of artistic expression. The Internet and youtube in particular has enabled a whole range of self-directed learning to a very high standard.

    Take “dish washing” for example. There are at least 10 people in Singapore that I personally know who can build a state of the art “dish washing” and cutlery-polishing machine small enough, cheap enough and quiet enough to fit in the bowels of a shopping mall to service all the food court and restaurtants. We can do this because of our easy access to all the patents filed by the leading lights in the field via google patents, the access to leading Mittelstand suppliers and the now increasingly cheap and standard programmable electronic controllers.

    Unfortunately, we are stopped from doing so.

    Our URA’s industrial land allocation policy forces us to transport all the dirty dishes and cutlery from the City/Town center where the malls are based to Bukit Batok or Woodlands Industrial Estate where central dish washing facilities are allowed to be based. We then have to persuade people to work in these far flung places during the graveyard shift in order to clean the dishes and cutlery in time to be transported back to the city/town centers.

    That is NUTS.

    • 9 Saycheese 2 November 2013 at 00:17

      I agree that is NUTS but how do our luxury hotels do their dishes?

      • 10 twasher 2 November 2013 at 15:32

        Erm. Maybe I’m missing something, but it’s very common in other countries to have automatic dishwashers even in home kitchens. Restaurants will have more heavy duty versions. There’s no need to re-invent the dishwasher; much of the world already uses it. Perhaps individual vendors are put off installing one because of the cost of the machine, but I don’t see what’s stopping food court managers from installing a big one for all the vendors.

      • 11 FC 3 November 2013 at 20:49

        These systems are flow based and have a much higher throughput than the typical automatic dishwashers one associates with home kitchens. Many airports caterers use these non-batch based systems to turn around high volumes. However, the footprint needs to be further bespoked to fit spaces available in the backrooms of malls or alternatively allocating space by policy just like mandating waste water managements system. All malls have mandatory waste oil, fat, and grease management systems needed to support such systems. So we are already half-way there.

  7. 12 yuen 1 November 2013 at 12:55

    I am sure SG government thinks it is very pro-technology – it spends much money on R&D and on education in tech areas, including a new university of technology and design, and is probably genuinely puzzled why tech careers are unpopular, but the recent SMRT problems provides some explanation: the regime of the previous CEO, who had a retail background, valued the MRT station retail operation more than engineering maintenance, because the former generated profit while the latter cost money; I believe such short sighted management is widely practised

  8. 14 Fox 2 November 2013 at 11:10

    The need for engineers is related to the use of technology in the economy. As the saying goes, necessity is the mother of all invention. The availability of plentiful labour in Singapore is a strong disincentive to the use of capital-intensive, labour-saving technology. This is further exacerbated by the small Singapore market which limits the innovation and adoption of new technologies.

    Ironically, deliberate government policy of easy foreign labour availability self-sabotaged the drive for Singapore to become a high-tech economy. One only has to go to South Korea and Taiwan, where the foreign labour is far more restricted, to see the stark difference in the adoption of labour-saving practices and equipment. This is why in SK and Taiwan, engineers are paid significantly more than the average worker, unlike in Singapore. Because of this, I would even venture to say that Singapore has the form of an advanced economy but not its function.

    Engineers in Singapore are less likely to develop their technical skills because they have fewer opportunities to be exposed to advanced technology. In many Singapore-based companies, when there is a need to get a worker with some kind of advanced technical skill, they usually look abroad because MOM makes it so easy. While this is great for companies, it is usually bad for Singapore-based engineers.

    In the US and EU, companies are more willing to develop these skills in-house, so to speak, because of the skilled labour limitations. This is why many of the high-level engineering expatriates in Singapore are from the US and EU. The human resource ecology in these places is far more capable of developing these niche skills than Singapore. If you observe very carefully, many of Singaporeans with niche engineering and technical skills have considerable working experience in the US where they could receive advanced training in these fields.

    As long as companies are allowed easy access to foreign labour, it seems unlikely to me that engineers would be valued in Singapore.

    • 15 Kelvin 2 November 2013 at 16:25

      Good points. I ‘arm chio’ when I see that the minister in charge of improving labor productivity is an army general. And this general happens to be of a conscripted army where labor is abundant because of the law.

    • 16 Hazeymoxy 5 November 2013 at 15:58

      I agree with your post except one small pt – that SG is a small market. We’re at 5.2M already. We gotta stop thinking we’re *that* small ‘cos we’ve reached the size of several Nordic countries. And if they can score that high on so many (of the good) markers, then surely we can. Something clearly isn’t right here.

      And apart of dishwashers, how about automated kiosks at petrol stations? Why do we need people to fill up our gas tank and wipe our windscreens? On top of that, the store at petrol stations are getting larger and customers can now pay bills there. This is not the type of service and convenience we should be aiming towards.

      Productivity at its lowest point.

  9. 17 Png Kiok Khng 2 November 2013 at 14:40

    Engineers in Singapore are in the same class as security guards. Important to have but not important enough to be appreciated (and thus be paid according to their value).
    To me, those in the finance sector are wealth distributor and though an important role but their value add cannot justify the pay. Engineers on the other hand are value creator yet there seems to be a glass ceiling when it comes to salary.
    My own experience pushed me out of the engineering career path because after 10 years I hit the salary ceiling and had to change to a managerial role instead to keep up.

  10. 18 henry 2 November 2013 at 15:08

    Speed is the driving force. Why reinvent the wheel? If a technology is available, Singapore will fast forward and buy it. But it is done with a mindset to squeeze as much from the vendor.

    When inflight entertainment was restricted to just 2 movies using projectors and film cartridges, it was decided to look for a vendor that could develop a system that could offer more than 12.

    Eventually a business partnership was negotiated with software engineers in Japan.No company in Singapore could do it. If we nurtured and plotted to have local engineers here to develop a system, it would take too long and others would have a working model and launched it far ahead of us.

    Our system is one of business. Of profit & loss and earnings. It is not one that develops. That takes too much time and the business risk too much.
    Sadly, we are very task orientated.. never to develop and create.

  11. 19 mike 2 November 2013 at 19:38

    I enjoy the mechanices of machinery, being a engineer myself in the marine industry, things are always improvinging or at least changing, large natural gas powered engines being one of them.
    But in the food service industry? Mass production is needed for the grocery stores, but local restraunts no thanks, There is one local place called Rocky &Carlos, been in business since the 40s, they have a large lunch crowd , the service is cafeateria style where you stand in the food line and pick what items you want. The servers are older ladies who have been there for years, any way portion control is done by eye, if you are a large person you geta large scoop of food, small people get a smaller size, everyone is happy.
    Personal interaction is vital in the food service industry.

  12. 20 Avinash 2 November 2013 at 21:10

    Without disagreeing with the broader point about conducive environments and such, I’d like to point out that there *is* a Singaporean firm that’s about to sell roti-making machines: http://rotimatic.com/

    • 21 yawningbread 3 November 2013 at 01:30

      Now that’s exciting, thanks for the link. It’s certainly progress, though I would note that the finished product looks more like naan, not prata.

      • 22 Avinash 3 November 2013 at 13:59

        Yup, they appear to be targetting the (wheat-flour-based, oil-optimized) chapati, as opposed to the maida (rice-flour)-based, layered prata. Now, naan is interesting, in that you’d also need a roast oven as well; perhaps it is easier to target this at an industrial level, than in household kitchens.

        In that sense, if any wannabe inventor is reading this, a thosai making machine is perhaps the next target!

  13. 23 Junnies Jun Yang 3 November 2013 at 00:19

    I see this issue from a different angle; the authoritarian/paternalistic ideology of the ruling party invariably infiltrates and percolates into the rest of Singapore. These forms of anti-critical (discourages criticism and promotes adherence to instructions from above) ideology trains and conditions the populace to be anti-critical themselves – in all spheres including business, industry and the economy (because you cannot isolate it only to the political sphere).

    To illustrate, the government controls mainstream discourse and overtly conditions the public to think that the ruling party has all the right answers through 1. mass media, 2. education, 3. control of political discourse. The public never thinks to question authority (and dissent is automatically excluded or “dealt with”) and assumes that authority knows best/ or are scared to criticise. In their own working space, or their private spheres, the same line of thinking “that authority knows best” rears its head and they never stop to criticise/critique whatever is happening.

    My experience of most Singaporeans is that they are dull, obedient and are so functionally-oriented that it becomes a pathology, a dysfunction – because they have been trained and conditioned to do so. Most “changes” are directed and generated top-down rather than bottom-up; most of them would rather keep quiet than risk being the “nail that stood out”; everything is reduced to the extremely (dys-)functional question of “what does this do for me? what can i gain from it? what is in it for me?”

    The result is a population seriously deficient in creativity (the ability to observe problems/inefficiencies and generate superior solutions that are by definition, unconventional/creative) and critical thinking (the habit, willingness and ability to criticise and critique)

    Of course, there are many other reasons – too much government intervention, wrong interventions, cultural reasons, etcetra, but it seems to me that they germinate from the same seed – a lack of creative/critical thinking to pre-empt, predict, reflect, and improve on the problems within the status quo/ establishment.

  14. 24 James 3 November 2013 at 20:26

    I already ate at such a sushi restaurant in Japan. The entire operation didn’t involve any human interaction at all. Orders were entered by computer and came out on a conveyor belt where dishes displayed the number of the diners’ table so that they knew which dishes to pick up off the belt.

    In Singapore, the salaries of engineers are too low. I think that a high level of immigration of low-skilled labourers is the primary cause. That broadly discourages investment into labour-saving innovations, and consequently true engineering jobs are not in high demand. Many MNCs also do not conduct R&D in Singapore; instead, they just do manufacturing, meaning that many “engineering” jobs are in manufacturing process control instead of in design. Process control is boring, and doesn’t require a high level of training. So when companies actually need highly trained engineers to solve problems, they have to look overseas for Ph.D. holders, for example, to bring in to do the work. (Their local technician-type engineers are not up to the task, given their pay scales. I suspect many top Singaporean engineers either emigrate or work in other sectors.)

    I also suspect it is far easier to bring in an S-Pass manufacturing engineer from overseas than it would be to do the same thing with, say, a lawyer. So salaries of engineers have stagnated while those of lawyers have increased. Then fewer good students choose engineering and perhaps MNCs are less likely to want to hire local engineers, given the quality of the applicants that they receive, and continue to view Singapore as just a manufacturing place, not an R&D Center. I strongly hope Singapore can become a knowledge-based economy, rather than one based on cheap labour, and I think the problems you have described may be a symptom of a bigger problem that should be studied by policy-makers. NUS and NTU engineering programs are very well respected and highly ranked in the world. Graduates from these programs deserve higher salaries.

  15. 27 DetachedObserver 8 November 2013 at 11:59

    Government is already well-aware of why high tech industry attracts the lowest level of FDI. Our public schooling system is part of the problem and the government’s reluctance to expend the capital to nurture engineering eco-system is another. Instead of doing selective importation of skilled, experienced immigrants to bolster the tech sector from all over the world, the flood-gates were opened to all matter of Tom, Dick and Harry from across Asia.

    In the mean time, incentives align on the civil service + ministerial level to get the bean counters flexing their rent seeking muscle in order to maximise capital extracted from local non-tradeables and monopolies, resulting in the rise of business costs depressing wages at the same time.

    Let’s face it, the problem with the previous and current generation of PAP leaders is that they had and currently have no vision on what is true value + wealth. As long as the dollar signs align, they go after it.

    Doesn’t help that traditional media in Singapore tend to look the other way even where there is criticism to be had.

  16. 28 Eddie Lim 12 November 2013 at 11:37

    I came from a family that produced 2 engineers & 1 software programmer. 2 of us are outside singapore now. All through my studying and working life, Engineers are never valued at the higher management levels. They seem to have this: “We can always buy the expertise” mindset. (First CEO of IDA comes to mind.)

    That said, Alex is right on most points. (although that doesn’t make it less depressing for the future of engineers in Singapore.)

    I think this non-valuing of engineers is a historical problem. The british has also never valued an engineering career highly. Engineers are highly valued in Europe and the US. Remember that the first & second PMs of Singapore all didn’t have an engineering background. All adds up to this sorry state. With the future where 3-d printing will be the manufacturing industry of today. This neglect of engineers will spell the death of manufacturing in Singapore.

    Just in reply to some other’s comments on dishwashing machines. The hotels have their own bespoke mass washing machines. When I was working in the hotels and restaurant industry (long, long ago) this type of machines was very common. Not sure if they outsourced this function later.

  17. 29 Ace 1 December 2013 at 17:56

    This topic is just too depressing to discuss further.. speaking as a locally graduated engineer it hurts that the degree and hard work does not have enough recognition.

    Just try to introduce yourself as an engineer and then try to introduce yourself as a banker or lawyer and you will immediately see the difference in people’s reaction.

    It’s just crap.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




For an update of the case against me, please see AGC versus me, the 2013 round.

Copyright

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 713 other followers

%d bloggers like this: