From: garrick@kpc.com (Garrick Le)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.vietnamese
Subject: [MISC] Re: Are we all OK
Date: 14 Aug 92 17:17:27 GMT
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer


Cuong_M._Nguyen.OSBU_North@xerox.com wrote:

>From:  garrick@kpc.com wrote:
>"Perhaps I did not make myself clear but I thought my statement was reasonably
>school standard :->> (~$#@)". OK let's agree on this and proceed:

Sorry,I take this back since grade school standard has deteriorated somewhat
recently -)))$#^%*&

>
>From:  garrick@kpc.com
>> Well,SCV is a public forum,so any ideas,statements thrown around is subject to
>>criticism.We should all learn to improve ourselves by listening to constructive
>>comments.Don't you think so?
>
>I agree but criticizing someone as "having such a limited vision" is a
>"constructive comment"??? If it is so then tell me an example of
>non-constructive comment based on the comment above.
That part is indeed constructive since I had explained earlier why I consider
GTV one with a very limited vision.So long as some criticism has good reasons,
it is constructive.Let me restate my reasonings in the previous posting:
 Basically,Giao claimed that no ideology can ever kill a population but it is
disaster that kills.This implies that communism does less harm than disaster
if it does any harm at all.Well,I rebutted his statement by showing evidences
of astronomical destruction and killings that the commies have done.
If some criticism is not pleasant,it does not necessarily mean that it is not
constructive because criticism itself is rather unpleasant by nature.Do I have
to refine my words to make it euphemistic in order for my remarks to be
constructive?As long as you try to prove someone wrong with decent reasons
and logic,it is constructive.
Probably,constructive means praise and complement in Cu+o+`ng's dictionary $#%&-))

I sincerely hope Mr.Cu+o+ng will get it this time.

3.
>>>       2. Don't start new thread with my name in it. Beside it's impolite, my
>>>name had nothing to do with this thread, it's your comment that started it.Be
>>>careful with Vietnamese names, they're not Bob, Jack, Gary, John, Dick, etc.
>>>If you want to make sure I read it, cc me a copy.
>
>> Well,I just thought since my posting is in direct answer to yours,what 's wrong
>>with putting your name in it?Didn't you put mine on yours first?Talking about
>>self contradiction !

>When did I have your name as the header of any article??? Prove it!

 What difference it makes whether it is in the header or it is in the message!
I am afraid you were just trying to make a moot point!This is euphemism already,
to be frank,your point is POINTLESS.
 Are you afraid the world will see your name because you have done something
wrong? This seems like a classic case of "co' ta^.t gia^.t mi`nh".
 I am really surprised why you have such an aversion to having your name
on the header.Perhaps,Mr.Cuong is too infamous already ,oops,I mean famous,
that he does not want any more exposure :-))
 Incidentally,you are more than welcome to put mine on your message header
anytime!Not that I want any fame but because I have nothing to hide.
 Furthermore,I 'd like to make a point to you that a Vietnamese with an
American/foreign name is not any less Vietnamese than others ..
Moreover,American full names are just as addressable as Vietnamese '.
I don't want to start a new debate,that is just my point.
 Last but not least,are you sure you know what nettiquette and email literacy
mean ??? Certainly,I have not seen much exhibition of such traits from you yet
if any at all!
 Unfortunately,sometime you can not use constructive criticism to certain
individuals...sigh.


Garrick