Are you a Singapore civil servant thinking of joining the Government’s new dating service FirstDate? 💗   Don't worry, you won't be paired with your colleague as officers from the same agency won't be matched, says GovTech.   https://str.sg/j44W Here’s the full detailed guide for you 💌       🔍 What Is FirstDate?   - Who runs it: GovTech Singapore — born from their internal hackathon, not commissioned by another agency  - What it is: A Singpass-verified dating pilot for public officers — not open to the general public right now - Core idea: Fight "choice overload" & swipe fatigue by giving one match at a time, focusing on shared values        ✅ Am I Eligible?   - Age: 21–35 years old inclusive - Status: Public officer, unmarried — single, widowed, or divorced - ID: Must have & sign in with Singpass - Same-agency protection: ✅ You will NOT be matched with anyone from your own agency        📝 How to Sign Up & Timeline   - Invites sent: 29 Sep 2026 via email to eligible officers  - Sign-ups close: 5 Oct 2026, 23:59  - Matching starts: After sign-ups close  - Future plans: No decision yet on full launch, expansion, or opening to non-public officers        ⚙️ How It Works   Step 1 — Questionnaire   ~30 questions covering:   - Lifestyle, interests, travel & food preferences - Values, relationship goals (e.g. wanting children) - Age range you'd date, dealbreakers (religion, smoking, diet)    Step 2 — The Matching Algorithm   - Uses Gale‑Shapley Stable Marriage algorithm — Nobel‑prize winning framework used for hospital residencies & school admissions  - Produces stable, mutual‑preference matches — you only get matched with someone who also ranks you highly - One match per cycle only — no endless browsing  - Match summary includes compatibility score & personal note   Step 3 — After Being Matched   - Both get notified by SMS ✉ - 72‑hour window to say Yes / No - Your profile is only visible to your match — no one else sees it  - Contact details shared ONLY if both say Yes 🤝 - If Yes → connect & plan your date; "Date Quest" activity suggestions available  - If No → you go back for the next matching cycle   Step 4 — Privacy & Data   - Follows government data security standards - You can deactivate & request full data removal anytime  - Employer cannot access your data or profile        ⚠️ Key Things to Know   - Algorithm ≠ magic: Experts say it screens out obvious mismatches but cannot guarantee chemistry or long‑term success — you’ll only know when you meet  - Match may not be your #1 pick: Gale‑Shapley finds stability, not everyone’s top choice — highly desired people get matched with their best available option  - Small pool risk: If sign‑ups are low, matches may not expand beyond who you already know  - Dealbreaker feedback: Early user noted limited options in some questions; this is a pilot so feedback will shape improvements        📌 Quick Recap   Detail   Who Public officers 21–35, unmarried  Sign‑ups By 5 Oct 23:59  Matches 1 at a time, Gale‑Shapley algorithm  Same‑agency Blocked ✅  Data Protected, never shared with employer  Status Pilot — may not expand    Ready to join? Check your work email invite & sign in via Singpass at the official site 💗      

In b4 pineapple too lenient, should use durian

Caning too lenient for some crimes.  

Against the 3 guys for beo upskirt & molest?

KMT insisting on caning, planning to propose bill DISCORD: KMT lawmakers love caning, but would not use it for crimes such as offenses committed by legislators, major economic crimes or treason, a DPP lawmaker said By Hollie Younger / Staff writer, with CNA Add TT as Preferred Source The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) plans to propose amendments to the Criminal Code to allow caning as a punishment for certain crimes, after a proposed caning referendum was vetoed by the Central Election Commission (CEC) last month, KMT Legislator Hung Meng-kai (洪孟楷) said yesterday. The party is proposing between three and 12 strokes as punishment for serious crimes, including drug driving that results in death or serious injury, child abuse resulting in death or serious injury, aggravated sexual assault and large-scale fraud, Hung said. The CEC reviewed the referendum proposal on caning on Aug. 28 and ruled that it did not meet the requirements of the Referendum Act (公民投票法). Chinese Nationalist Party legislators Hung Meng-kai, left, and Hsu Yu-chen hold placards at a news conference at the Legislative Yuan in Taipei yesterday. Photo: Lo Pei-de, Taipei Times KMT caucus deputy secretary-general Hsu Yu-chen (許宇甄) and Hung held a news conference at the KMT caucus on their bill. As the referendum was rejected, the party plans to submit the draft amendments to the legislature for discussion and review, Hung said. Caning would only be used for the most serious crimes and be handed out by the courts on a case-by-case basis and under strict guidelines, he said. Courts would consider the infringement of legally protected interests, the number of victims, the method of the offense, criminal proceeds, the perpetrator’s attitude after the crime and the risk of reoffending, he added. The draft amendments would propose that caning be used as a punishment for large-scale fraud convictions with sentences of at least three years in prison and involving proceeds of at least NT$5 million (US$156,976) or at least three victims, he said. The maximum would remain at 12 strokes even when multiple offenses are combined for sentencing, he said. Caning would not be used on anyone younger than 18 at the time of the offense, or 65 or older, and doctors would first conduct assessments and issue a written opinion. If a doctor determines that caning poses a serious health risk, it would be stopped immediately, he added. If caning cannot be carried out, it would be replaced by a prison sentence. Democratic Progressive Party caucus chief executive Chuang Jui-hsiung (莊瑞雄) said that KMT lawmakers “love caning,” but would not use it for crimes such as offenses committed by legislators, large-scale economic crimes or treason. In cases of sexual assault, the priority should be providing assistance to victims and prevention of such crimes, rather than corporal punishment, Chuang said. For aggravated fraud, focus should be placed on recovering victims’ losses and dismantling criminal organizations rather than assuming that caning would make criminal organizations disband or ensure that the money would be recovered, he added.