curry drama

this genius invite landed in my inbox last week and i couldn't resist sharing it.

There's never really a need for a reason to get together and chow down, but in the event that you do require an explanation you'll find it over here:

Reason #1 is located over here http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC110808-0000102/Number-of-neighbour-disputes-hit-high
(Now whoever heard of such a preposterous thing!)

Reason #2. is located over here http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=254441147918239
(A good excuse to cook and eat in good company if I ever heard one)

trust ashie, hostess extraordinaire, to throw a politically aware dinner party!

i, for one, was completely oblivious to the curry going-ons. however, this alternative viewpoint, as voiced by the voice of reason (naturally), was that perhaps it's all a storm in a teacup (curry pot?)

understanding the furor a bit better, it seems like netizens were unhappy with the indian family being told to restrain from cooking curry when the sensitive-nosed chinese family was at home. however, this arrangement must've been suggested by either party and agreed to by the other. i.e. it must've been mutual and consensual. so there didn't seem to be a need for all the anger at the result.

for the uninitiated, mediation is never about a one-sided outcome and because it's not binding. this is unlike a court order which is 1. determined by the adjudicator and 2. binding. thus, the mediator's role isn't to decide the outcome based on the facts presented so any angst towards the mediator is misdirected. the mediator's role is to be move the parties towards a mutually beneficial solution.

there you go, mediation in a nutshell i.e. me clinging desperately to what little legal knowledge i can purport to semi-possess.

that said, we really don't need much of an excuse to eat curry nor to party. what a great way to share curry appreciation and champion tolerance.

if you're curious as to how the party went, clickety click to ash's right here.