no subject

weiloh1

下面引用由shw在 2005/07/08 05:52pm 发表的内容：
看来weiloh1的记性不好。这种突然间杀出来的尖锐但偶尔失去方向的新人帖子，会不定期地出现在《海外风云》版。weiloh1自己也参与过之前（全辩和中马赛）的论战，怎么就忘记了呢？
当然，如果weiloh1认为这次的论 ...

I did not forget the last round controversial. But this time, it is sharper and much more aggressive but sometimes less accurate (this is the whole point).

Furthermore, there are so many of them and all point towards one direction within a very short period of time. That is why I said this time around, the standard is higher, more sophicated, more organized but not necessary better.

SSLim

下面引用由weiloh1在 2005/07/09 12:37pm 发表的内容：
I did not forget the last round controversial. But this time, it is sharper and much more aggressive but sometimes less accurate (this is the whole point).
Furthermore, there are so many of them  ...

mm...interesting.

Care to share which direction this "group" of people is pointing towards to? What do you think the reason is (for the direction)?
Just wonder whether it could be because most of the people are sharing the same view of a particular incident and therefore the arguments/views are pointing at the same direction? And because there is lack of substantiated explanation/counter arguments from the parties involved (being blamed), the direction appears to be just one sided but sharper and more aggressive?

Anyway,totally agree with you that this time round, the standard is much higher and of high quality..... and i have to say, i think it is much better too.

shw

下面引用由weiloh1在 2005/7/9 00:37pm 发表的内容：
I did not forget the last round controversial. But this time, it is sharper and much more aggressive but sometimes less accurate (this is the whole point).
Furthermore, there are so many of them  ...

我不知道weiloh1说这次的争论更加“aggressive”的指标是什么，但是这次的争论（至少到目前为止），还无需版主或论坛管理员封掉任何人的ID，所以我不赞同更加“aggressive”的说法。同样的“less accurate”的说法我也有所保留。真要为“less accurate”的原因做解释的话，我认为：
1.“当事人”保持沉默，讨论难有进展。
2.一些人试图阻止或干扰有关的讨论，模糊了问题的焦点。

也因为“当事人”保持沉默，演变成好像只有一方在唱独角戏，才会有“so many of them and all point towards one direction”的印象。不想上回那样，双方一来一往，一方“情绪激动、措辞激烈”，另一方“冷静理智、条理分明”。真要说“more sophicated, more organized”的话，这次的“独角戏”远远不如上回的“双簧”。

疑问：
既然是“less accurate”和“more aggressive”，为什么又会是“the standard is higher”？既然是“the standard is higher”，为什么会“not necessary better”？
如果是以“sophicated”和 “organized”作为衡量“standard ”的指标，根据我上述的看法，这次的争论，不如上回的呀！

infoz

国能有双敏加江翰就很强吗？
在语言、逻辑、理论等的造诣还有待改进吧？
大家评评他们的表现吧！

shw

下面引用由双敏在 2005/7/12 06:19pm 发表的内容：
对于网上的匿名人士，
我敢肯定他们不是马大的。
先不论他们说的对不对，
他们无非是想以“攻击国能”来突现自己马大的身份，
...

我不敢像双敏那样说得斩钉截铁，华语辩论网那么多的用户，应该有来自马大的朋友。我只是觉得M'sia和他的“伙伴”的那一部戏演得太滑稽了。

还是回到《古城巨辩》吧！

SSLim

奇怪， 国能不乏新人啊，为什么《古城巨辩》三缺一却宁愿向外借兵都不用自己人呢？

Kewei

或许国能大学是在等待着一位新人进来，以补这个空缺吧！

凌国文

下面引用由infoz在 2005/7/12 06:30pm 发表的内容：
国能有双敏加江翰就很强吗？
在语言、逻辑、理论等的造诣还有待改进吧？
大家评评他们的表现吧！

个人单打独斗能力超强
团队互补默契尚待改善。。。

对不起，我们可以另辟一个帖子讨论吗？这里好像是“古城举辩”。。。

shw

下面引用由凌国文在 2005/7/14 05:21pm 发表的内容：
个人单打独斗能力超强
团队互补默契尚待改善。。。
对不起，我们可以另辟一个帖子讨论吗？这里好像是“古城举辩”。。。

赞成，不然越谈越离题。

不如说一说双方当天的内容和针对对方内容的反驳。