From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: a few question about taiwan
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:48:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: nntpd.1992Sep15.155547.12153
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <BuM1yG.EI8@rlyeh.multisys.com>, rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes...
>In article <1992Sep15.021922.24902@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes:
>=
>=I believe you are referring to my post #29557. Frankly, I dont even know
>=you why should I hate you? I dont believe anyone will hate you. You are 
>=not the only TI supporter on this net. We are not all KMT supporters, at 
>=least not me. 
> 
>This is a very intersting 'something' happens all the time.
>People seems love to frame the other people with a name
>or term.
> 
>It seems I have been framed as a Ti-er or TI-supporter
>all the time. Can't people think of something else
>except capping other people.

Have you said "Taiwan has been an independent country for hundred years".
Have you also said you will vote for it on Du Shi-hua Heath's question 
"If Taiwan declares her independence, how many people will vote for it?" 
If these do not support TI, what else? (BTW, I have nothing against the 
idea of TI).

Could you please explain your "Taiwan has been an independent country for 
hundred years"? I have been answering all your questions, time for you to 
answer this one? If I dont hear from you then I assume you are not able to.

>Did I ever say 'You, Li are such such-er'.

No, because I have not taken a position on TI or reunification issue.

>Now, this is a real name calling.

Calling me 'such-er' is meaningless to me. There is no such word.

>=least not me. This newsgroup is an open forum, everyone can speak freely. 
> 
>Except people like you love to giving other netters caps
>to wear, if their arguments do not fit in your mind.

If I give anything, that is not cap but opinion.

>=But if you are talking ridiculously and rudely that certainly will draw 
>=a lot of criticism. If you continue to do so then dont expect others treat 
> 
>Sometimes I am wondering, is the person calling others names
>ridiculous, or the person being name calling attacked ridiculous.
> 
>It seems, if other people's arguments contradit to your
>believe, then those people will be called by you as
>'talking ridiculously and rudely'.

No, I have posted a lot for three weeks, you are the only one I feel 
consistently talking ridiculously and rudely. And I am not the only 
one feels that way.

>=you with respect. As you said, TI seems to be an equal to KMT on the net, 
> 
>Did I ever try to make you respect me?

I dont think you care any respect from anybody, but many people do care.

>Jeus, sounds like I am a Chun-Kai-Shen II.

There is difference between worship and respect. I dont think you want to
be Chun-Kai-Shen's son. :-)

>=why no one stands by your opinion but all you have received is against 
>=your opinion. You dont self-examine but blame for others. 
> 
>That's real life, mannn. 

Yes, but that also tells something.

>Did I ever blame you?
>What did I blame you for? 

Yes, you did. You think all posts against your opinion because people hate 
you. Let me quote from your previous post, 

"I am honor to be the #1 target of those 'hateful persons'.
 They try to paint me as evil as possible, but I am evil
 and I am welcome to be praised as evil as possible.  :-) "

At least I dont hate you. But you certainly keep me write more.

>Yes, I did and do criticize KMT and CCP a lot. 

So do I.

>You can not be serious enough to think that you are KMT 
>and all the time I was criticizing KMT was acturally criticizing you, 
>are you?

I am not pro-anything. To me, KMT is just a political party as DPP. They
should be equal and no superior or inferior.

When you were criticizing KMT I certainly dont feel being criticized. But I 
do express my opinion when I think criticism is not appropriate.

>=Just based on your statement above, I dont think you are mentally healthy,
>=not even to mention your other opinion.
> 
>It seems some netters keep calling me mentally something.
>So it is you after all. So you are a psychologist now.
>Well, what can I say.

Yes, it is me. I have received two e-mails supporting my opinion in post
#29557. 

>=>I have a bad memory to remember people's name. This is
>=>why I always argue with arguments not with people.
>=>(This means I don't care the posters are TI-er, KMT-er,
>=>CCP-er or whatever-er)
>=
>=We too. We only argue with arguments not with people. 
> ^^      ^^
> 
>Who is we? A mentally ill double personality patientS?

Many people on this net argue with arguments not with people. Any objection 
from you?

>I wrote,
>=>I still remember couple years ago, no one on the net
>=>will admit he or she is a TI promoter except Mitch.
>=>Now, TI seems to be an equal to KMT and people start
>=>to worry about what if TI-ers elected by the people
>=>to be in charge of the new government.
>=
>=Frankly if majority TIers like you I dont think there is a chance. 
> 
>I dont't know you care so much about TIers.
>Oh! Yea! Right! Since you believe you, yourselfe are KMT and

See, who is giving the cap, have I said I believe KMT? 

>KMT has gone for TI which means TI includes TI,DDP,KMT,
>so you should care for TI.

If this TI is going to be an independent country under name of "Republic of 
Taiwan". KMT has not gone for this TI yet.

>AS to me, I just don't give a damm about TI, KMT, DDP, CCP
>or whatever.
> 
>I wrote,
>=>IMHO, it is really a big progress toward a dmocratic
>=>Taiwan.
>=
>=We all wish that.
> ^^

Many Taiwan people wish so. Any objection from you?

> 
>Getting serious, I heard psychologists often are mentally
>unstable.   :-)
> 
>I wrote,
>=>I believe there has a lot of users in Taiwan paying
>=>their attention on SCT closely, though they seldom
>=>speak out their opinion.
>=
>=That's good, I hope they can make a right choice.
>              ^
> 
>One of the personalty seems to win out at last.

Sorry I have only one personality.