原帖由 Cantona 於 2006-6-7 11:13 發表
喂，你這篇回文好似同你之前回文的論點有所出入喎
你之前既回文，主要係話柴板友不應批評菜菜子
你對上既回文，係話柴板友針對菜菜子
你所指出既根本係兩回事
就你之前既回文，我依然覺得你既論點自相矛盾，你有必要解釋一下
就你對上一篇既回文，如果你覺得我誤解你，請你先好好將你既論點表達出黎
起碼唔止我一位板友認為你之前既言論有所不當！
另外，如果你覺得柴板友針對菜菜子，不妨先提出證據，再跟大家討論
There are not different, there is a "Therefore" relationship
Mr Chai shouldn't put a negative comment on Ms Choi because Mr Chai 針對 Mrs Choi's personal feeling
And thats what 針對 means here
The freedom of speech should not be used this way: Once freedom of speech should not affect others'
freedom of speech.its like the irule #37/39 here.
Mr Chai's view ( at least thats what i got from it..) is that Ms Choi's view is problematic because he feel so.
"相信沒有人會視為『普通聚會』" <= what does it mean?
I believe he is trying to say if there is such a person who doesnt value the gathering,
he/she is being abnormal or wrong.
And thats WRONG!Any individual can express their ideas & feelings but shouldn't use it as an tool to ATTACK others ideas & feelings.Unless he/she can prove that the expression from an individual is wrong.
However, that doesnt apply on this case, coz there is no absolute right or wrong in this topic
For example, If I publish a book saying that 1+1 = 3 without any support, you can definitely denounce or put a negative comment on me coz thats a wrong statement
I cant defense with the excuse of Freedom of Speech, thats just wrong~
However, if i public a book saying that I don't like math, you cant denounce me or put a negative comment on me saying i am wrong/abnormal, coz thats my feeling and thats my freedom of speech.
BUT you can do (thats the most you can do, because thats your freedom of speech)is saying that you love math
although this is totally oppose my idea.
In a civilized society, people should learn how to accept others' ideas or opinions even if its opposing you
These words are from Mr Chai as well:
"大家出發點不同﹐本人認為歷史在部份問題上﹐就有『絕對的對與錯』﹐
但對於從不同史觀論點出發﹐是可以尊重的。"
I just dont understand why he can accept the words from boardmates but not Ms Choi.
if you still think I live in barbarian age, would you tell/teach me how i can be civilized?
By the way, please excuse my poor english
i cant type chinese in this computer~
[ 本帖最後由 dicksonboy 於 2006-6-7 12:13 編輯 ]
無論如何，請dickson兄指出柴板友有關針對菜菜子的言論，再拿來跟大家討論
否則你無論回文有多少長，也沒有用
原帖由 Cantona 於 2006-6-7 13:26 發表
無論如何，請dickson兄指出柴板友有關針對菜菜子的言論，再拿來跟大家討論
否則你無論回文有多少長，也沒有用
究竟你有無睇D回文架…？
盤古初開果陣我已經問柴兄為何蔡小姐發表個人意見都要被人抽秤，批評
我亦曾嘗試向你解釋點解我有如此觀點，
無奈你只係不斷空泛地指我打長文無用，觀點係錯誤，但係又唔講原因
只係牢固於己見，令人失望
我再講一次點解我認為柴兄不應批評蔡小姐
既然柴兄提出
‘大家出發點不同﹐本人認為歷史在部份問題上﹐就有『絕對的對與錯』﹐
但對於從不同史觀論點出發﹐是可以尊重的。’
（留意：本人所發既文係響柴兄提出佢對歷史之看法及處理不同觀點既手法之後發）
點解佢唔尊重蔡小姐既觀點，言論自由？
我完全唔明並唔認同柴兄厚此薄彼既手法
呢個就係我認為柴兄唔應該對蔡小姐既個人意見作出批評既原因
我見C兄你回文，我相信你唔明我觀點，所以慢慢打左篇唔知你有無睇既回應
根住你仍然唔明，我再重覆做一次
我只係希望你理解我既觀點，並提出如果有謬誤既就提點下我
假如我真係有問題，點解你唔指出，亦唔作出糾正？
正如lch兄提醒小弟既想法係忽略左蔡小姐既身份，無問題，虛心受教
你完全唔明白討論既價值：提出己見之餘，都要接收唔同意見，然後改進大家既觀點
假如你唔願意嘗試去睇下其他人意見，討論都變得無意義
原帖由 dicksonboy 於 2006-6-8 02:07 發表
點解佢唔尊重蔡小姐既觀點，言論自由？
我完全唔明並唔認同柴兄厚此薄彼既手法
就柴板友在本文的言論，我完全看不出他有不尊重菜菜子的地方，更看不出他不尊重菜菜子的言論自由
請提出l引文以作你的證據，否則你不停在呻吟也沒有用的 :lo
*我在對上的回文，早已奉勸兄台quote出引文，再跟大家討論架啦
你不停再說「柴板友不對、不尊重他人」... 如果沒有提出證據，說多少次也沒有用
想問一個問題:
點解要平反64?
原帖由 DK704_3N133 於 2006-6-8 19:35 發表
想問一個問題:
點解要平反64?
建議另開新題討論。
原帖由 chai 於 2006-6-8 23:22 發表
建議另開新題討論。
我問呢個問題係直接同你所發表ge題目有關
所以我認為無需開新題討論
原帖由 DK704_3N133 於 2006-6-8 23:37 發表
我問呢個問題係直接同你所發表ge題目有關
所以我認為無需開新題討論
政府殺人有罪﹐必定要翻案。
對不起﹐還是主張另開新題
xdelete
[ 本帖最後由 DK704_3N133 於 2006-6-9 17:56 編輯 ]