- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 25694 Hour
- Reading permission
Allow me to talk about the one who is not first.|
I support my friend chairman with a strong note of protest to chinadaily.
To shame chairman in the open like this is reprehensible, chinadaily.
I speak the same way in front of and at the back of people so here are my thoughts.
At first I thought chairman was a British agent whose only job was to plant seeds of discord in the forum here so that it fails to thrive.
That was my first impression.
I formed that impression because I found that chairman could write very well and yet he chose not to dedicate all his energies towards that pursuit in the forum. Instead, he created handles that tickled people the wrong way sometimes. I wondered why.
So my logic told me he must be an agent.
Who else has the time like he does to do this all day long and in fact became quite adept at it? Not even 007 James Bond could do that so colorfully.
Then a few months after I knew him I had the opportunity to know him better and I changed my mind, because I found that his actions were a reflection of his temperament, not because he wanted to disrupt the forum as an agent.
He has a great sense of humor and it is difficult to understand him sometimes -- like that post where he was supposedly supporting Bush.
He also was a very naughty fellow for his age, considering the fact that he played multiple roles with so much success.
Yet what convinced me finally was the fact that he got into so much trouble with the administration that he was banned.
No agent would have been that indiscreet as to allow himself to be banned.
So my conclusion is that so long as he is not an agent I don't care what else he could be, and I am proud to be his friend, and I would never leave him when he needs me.
After a prolonged absence I came back to the forum recently and found that two of my best friends here -- Thos and chairman, were at odds with each other. I was truly surprised.
I felt there was a great misunderstanding between the two.
Now I know chairman believes that Thos has an anti-China secret agenda, and Thos' reciprocates such feelings.
Both of these two men are my friends and obviously they are both wrong about each other.
It is my judgment (for its two cents worth) that neither one acts as an agent nor cherishes a secret anti-China agenda.
I refused to be drawn into their bickering until I saw Thos' post in the Opinion section of your paper.
I do not blame Thos in writing it because I also feel chairman has become obsessed with an innocent man, and I have told chairman face to face about it.
But for CD to openly air this private quarrel in the Opinion Page means that someone here is really upset with chairman.
Since I came back I have gone back to read some of the old posts and I could sense that chairman did do a few things that he wouldn't have done if he knew I was reading them, but I knew that was his personality and prerorgative.
Whether he is loyal to his friend or not is his business.
I have come to the same conclusion about Thos.
I like his straight-forwardness and do not blame him at all for his temper tantrums as is shown in this post.
It is not my wish to see enmity between my friends, and it is not up to me to see them reconcile either.
Each of them has a reason to dislike the other one so much and no one is more understanding of their legitimate reasons than they themselves.
I feel they have a chance to reconcile because they haven't really known each other that long -- a few months tops.
So they should be given room to express their anger, and the forum has no business putting Thos' gripes in the front page like they are doing here.
Then there is the case of the Singaporean who had not apologized to any mainland women for his insolent remarks camouflaged in a rhetorical question of "Does that mean mainland women are all whores?"
You are letting your personal likes and dislikes interfere with your judgment in your job, mods.
By not taking down my demand for him to apologize, you are telling this pseudo-Japanese man that he needs to apologize, and yet you still continue to hang his rubbish posts up there as if they were delicious lychee meat.
Any knowledgeable person looking at those posts knows that they are worthless, and yet you have not enforced your own rule when you failed to act on your warning, so much so that the old farrt is now denying that you ever asked him to apologize.
I think the mainland women administrators in your forum should have some self-respect and ask him to apologize in no uncertain words.
I know my words may not sit well with you but again, I am not a flatterer and this is not a popularity contest.
I hope you mark my words and not just pretend you do.
If you don't put my posts up there it wouldn't hurt me, but please ask the old farrt to apologize not by implication, but by action.
Otherwise, the neocons are justified to pay lip service to the ONE CHINA PRINCIPLE if they can come and tell the Chinese: "Hey, don't blame us, that's what your Chinadaily women do too. They asked an old fool to apologize for an inane remark about them being whores; the fool did not do so, and they just shoved their demand under the rug."
Is that the kind of remark you want to hear from the Bushies?
Regards to all,