All comments are subject to moderation by eChinacities.com staff. Because we wish to encourage healthy and productive dialogue we ask that all comments remain polite, free of profanity or name calling, and relevant to the original post and subsequent discussion. Comments will not be deleted because of the viewpoints they express, only if the mode of expression itself is inappropriate.

meimei2

Let me assure you Mr Solhacehabravida, Mr Hale is NOT "probably, generally, mostly like any one of us". Seeing you postings he only like you... as English friend say "barking mad" the pair of you! We feel so sorry for pair of you and your wifes.

Jan 27, 2013 21:47 Report Abuse

Guest7816

Dear, please don't encourage him further.

Jan 27, 2013 22:27 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Meimei, you are just confused. You are just wrong, MeiMie. You say "let me assure you" . . . but you don't even understand what I said. Mr Hale, and you and I, everyone in the world, are 99.9 percent genetically the same. We are all, generally, mostly the same. You are looking at his behavior, Meimie. Another writer looked at your behavior, when you said that "hacking" Mr. Hale's websites was "justice"; that writer said that your ideas are just as bad as Mr. Hale's. I don't want to judge your behavior or Mr. Hale's. I have never tried to do that. You are just wrong, Meimie. You simply don't understand what I have written. Everything I have written here is about the the police and court system in China. All this discussion about Mr. Hale's stupid behavior would never happen in a country that had a modern justice system. Because China does not have a modern justice system normal citizens like you approve of punishing Mr. Hale by hacking his websites. Hacking is also a crime. You approve of hacking Mr. Hale's websites because there is no RULE OF LAW in CHina. And you don't seem to see that your behavior is very much like Mr. hale's behavior. But I have never approved of Mr. hale's behavior and I don't approve of hacking his websites . . . becasue it is all crime. And I was never talking bout Mr. hale's behavior. You are completely missing the point, MeiMie. You are angry at me now and you have insulted me and my wife because you are unable to really understand the facts and logic that I have used. But that is okay, I understand. Yo have not had an opportunity to learn about these things. that is why I have tried to be patient with you. Please, don't be so rude MeiMei. You don't know me and you are simply twisting the meaning of my words. You think I said Mr. Hale's behavior is "generally, mostly" like everyones else's behavior. But that isn't what I said. The thing is, I would never support Mr. Hale's behavior but I also think that you are behaving very poorly when you call hacking Mr. Hale's website "justice." SO, whose behavior is more like Mr. Hale's, MeiMie mine or yours? BUT, AGAIN, I wasn't talking about behavior, I was talking about THE RULE OF LAW. and in my last post I was talking about how all people are genetically 99.9 percent the same, and therefore, in certain situations we are all capable of crime. You said you appove of crime. You said you approve of hacking, which is a crime. I don't approve of Mr. Hale's crime and I don't approve of you when you say that "hacking Mr' Hale's websites is justice. Mr. hale committed a crime and you said you approve of using crime to punish him. If your country had a mature justice system, Mr. hale would be punished and normal citizens, like yourself would not feel that it is "justice" to punish him by hacking his websities. You and Mr. Hale both seem to think that it is okay to punish people with crime. Mr. hale punished the cars drivers (by scratching the cars)becaue he thought they should not be on the sidewalk - but he committed a crime. The people who hacked Mr. Hale's websites, also committed a crime. Your behaviors are the same.

Jan 27, 2013 23:16 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

I have all the patience in the world with someone like MeiMei who simply has not had an opportunity t learn about the facts and logic I have referred to. But you sir, you are have no such excuse. You have yet to actually respond, logically, unemotionally, to any point I have made.

Jan 27, 2013 23:17 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Guest 7816. You said nothing . . .until you found an opportunity to say something rude - and in support of a Chinese person who clearly doesn't understand. In the future I will be happy to continue this discussion with any Chinese person - even if they are rude, who has difficulty understanding. And I would be happy to continue discussing this with any foreigner who wishes to behave maturely.

Jan 27, 2013 23:20 Report Abuse

Guest7816

I don't want to say more because you just go on and on and on. This isn't talking, this is you dominating and rambling on and on. It's boring. Sorry if it sounds impolite but this is how I feel. Leave me alone now. Goodbye!

Jan 28, 2013 09:22 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Hello, Meimei. I don't see any reply from you. Does this mean that you still do not understand that I was not supporting Mr. Hale's behavior? Does this mean that you still do not understand that I think behavior like Mr. Hale's behavior is very stupid? And will you now apologize for insulting me and my wife? You will notice that I have not asked Guest 7816 these questions, because he should be able to understand my points; thus, I understand that he is truly being rude. But I feel that you are being rude, simply because you do not really understand my words and because you do not understand my words you insulted me.

Jan 28, 2013 11:08 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

MeiMei, by now you should understand that you were wrong to think that I support Mr. Hale's behavior. But, I must repeat, I do believe it is not very mature for you to insult people as you have. And it is not very mature for you to say "hacking" Mr. Hale's websites is "justice." Hacking Mr. Hale's website is not justice: it is revenge; it is a crime. YES? You should see now that Mr. Hale's crime AND "hacking" Mr. Hale's websites are equally bad behavior. Yes? You should see by now that the real issue is that the Chinese justice system is immature. You should see now that normal citizens like you make very BIG DISCUSSIONS about one man - as has happen with Mr. Hale, because there is RULE OF LAW in China. YES? By now, you should see that, people such as yourself, believe that another crime (such as "hacking" Mr. Hale's website) is "justice" only because the justice system in China is immature. By now you should see that there is really no difference between the crime you supported (the crime of "hacking" Mr. Hale's website) and Mr. Hale's crime. YES? Both of these crimes are bad behavior. If China had a mature justice system normal citizesn, such as you, would not think tht crime should be punished with another crime. YES?

Jan 28, 2013 11:16 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

In countries that have a mature Justice System we avoid such BIG, ANGRY DISCUSSION as this discussion about Mr. Hale. If China had a mature justice system there would be no need to make such a BIG and ANGRY DISCUSSION ABOUT Mr. Hale. And then, you could use your TIME and your MIND for other important problems. But, perhaps I am making a mistake here, perhaps you enjoy being angry online?

Jan 28, 2013 11:17 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

If you wish to be left alone why did you fail to respond to any of my points but only wrote when you had something rude to say: Guest 7816 wrote - "Dear, don't humour him."

Jan 28, 2013 11:26 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Don't you not see how PATRONIZING it is for you to address MeiMei as you have when you wrote :"Dear, don't humour him any longer." Some might even say you are being sexist - but I'm an old fashion person in many ways so I wouldn't say that. But I do suspect you are being overly familiar -- in an effort to ramp up Meimei's anger and thereby draw approval to yourself. Some might say your behavior is quite transparent. In any case, your's is the sort of online 'communication' that I will work against without fail. Do you really think that the best use for the internet is 20 second insult laden 'blurps'. You supported MeiMei's insults. Really, Sir, and then you suggest that I have in some way 'bothered you'?????

Jan 28, 2013 11:35 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

GUEST 7816 wrote: "I don't want to say more because you just go on and on and on. This isn't talking, this is you dominating and rambling on and on. It's boring. Sorry if it sounds impolite but this is how I feel. Leave me alone now. Goodbye!" ---- what you call "going on and on" I would like you to see as my patient efforts, based on my faith that most people will listen to reason if I persist. I do not like to be forced to believe that a person is not really interested in reason. I fight against letting myself accept that rudeness, such as your rudeness, really indicates an unwllingness to be reasonable. That is why I am more patient with MeiMei than with you -- she is Chinese and likely has had no opportunity to learn of more worldly view-points. But you have, and so I am less incline to forgive your rudeness. But I am a very forgiving fellow, and I love to apply humour :)) You need not even apologize -- just reply unemotionally, with a bit of logic to what I have written and all will be in the past.

Jan 28, 2013 11:43 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

-- what you call dominating, I call being fair minded. -- you have been the one attacking. I simply called you on it. Because I like to be fair minded. But also because, just in case, there are fair-minded Chinese citizens reading this post I would like them to see that not all westerners are immature. -- if I had let myself get involved in swapping angry little 20 second posts with you, you would have been very happy to continue. -- you can not support your position nor justify your behavior and so now, once again, you are simply 'bailing out' of the discussion. -- I have spoken very openly and patiently with anyone who, in a mature fashion, commented about the length of my posts. It is, I will agree, a very sorry state of affairs that "it takes so many words to make a simply point in our world today." I have asked everyones consideration for my efforts . . . but I feel compelled to ask for that consideration only because "it can take a great many words to make a simply point in the world today." And even with a lot of words, some folks will always find ways to avoid patient discussion. -- it seems very clear to me that you were not interested in a real discussion; and you seem willing to see the best in people; nor are you capable of admitting when you are simply wrong. -- if you wish to be "left alone", don't interject rude comments: despite all my many human faults I am certainly trying to be reasonable and patient.

Jan 28, 2013 11:48 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Have the courage of your own, unclear, convictions . . . explain those convictions, if you have any. And if you really think I am wrong, explain yourself. There would be no need for me to continue expressing the same points again and again if the discussion focused on real issues, such as the lack of RULE by LAW in China. I will be as patient as a saint with any well reasoned comment that suggests I am wrong. But, 20 second insult laden blurps are not enjoyable or productive. And I will be patient with any CHinese indiidual who clearly has not understood and who is a victim of her own unresolved cultural anger at the misunderstood failings of her own justice system - even though she doesn't realize that may be the real root of her angry, I will be patient . . . because that is what the best thinkers in China have asked us foreingers to do when they issue a "Foreign Expert "Z" visa. Certainly they would not want us to come to China and get involved in senseless online insults.

Jan 28, 2013 11:51 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

-- so the fact is, Sir, it is I who should be asking you to mind your manners and stop avoiding real discussion and only intruding when you have an insult to offer.

Jan 28, 2013 12:01 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

GUEST 7816 Wrote: "leave me alone". When you asked me to "leave you alone" . . . What do you mean? "Leave you alone" from what? What is your goal? What is it that my "going on and on" has stopped you from doing? Could you explain that please? Did you have something you wanted to say? Come on now, let's be clear about this. Was there something you wished to say and I have not allowed you to say it? Just explain and I will be more than happy to apologize. But if you are suggesting I have misused the internet . . . well, I wouldn't know how to respond to that - I mean I very clearly asked for consideration for my efforts. I think that maybe you are misusing people and valuable resources . . but I don't want to be passing judgement.

Jan 28, 2013 12:06 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Guest 7816 wrote: "this isn't talking". Are you suggesting that insulting people is "talking?" Really? Are you suggesting that unthinking use of hyperbole such as approval of crime as "justice" is "talking"? Really? Is it "talking" when people air their dirty laundry online, going on and on about the personal details of another's life?" Is that "talking" or just gossip? When people reply even though they have clearly not understood each other is that "talking"? Surely you don't think that is "talking"??Is refusing to give others the benifit of the doubt, "talking"? Is it?? When people repeatedly refuse to address a speaker's comments but only attack the speaker's efforts, is that "talking"? I'm sure if you think about it you will realize that is not "talking", yes?? Would even a million "thumbs up" for popularity online turn insults into "talking"? Or is talking something we often must do -- but with patience, even if it is unpopular to say what we think?? Yes?? If I have obstructed your efforts to "talk" please go ahead and explain what you mean. But I think you will find that I have anticipated what you mean by "talking." In any case, please, give me an example of what you think "talking" is. The floor is yours.

Jan 28, 2013 12:17 Report Abuse

Lago

Solhace, if you look at all the posts you have dominated everything. When someone says something, you write 3-7 posts. It gets a bit old reading the same thing over and over. Also, Chinese people call foreigners 'dear' all the time, male or female.

Jan 29, 2013 16:04 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

I'D LIKE YOU TO THINK ABOUT SOMETHING, LAGOS. IN A SENSE, THE IMPLICATION OF YOUR WORDS IS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE AS MUCH FAITH IN PEOPLE AS I DO. My perserverence comes from that failth. I don't believe that people are capable of only dealing with 20 second blurbs, that are often insult ridden. I believe that if one persists in a good cause for good reasons, those good reason and the good cause will become clear.

Jan 29, 2013 19:42 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Indeed, Lagos, I thank you for your observation. it can also, GET VERY OLD SAYING THE SAME THING AGAIN AND AGAIN WITHOUT ANYONE ACTUALLY ADDRESSING WHAT IS SAID. Address my points, Lagos, and there will be less need for me to repeat myself. I simply want to initiate a discussion of what, not just I, but many of the new leaders of China are also interested in. A few writers did that, and I responded drictly to them. So, yes, Lagos, thank you for your observation but you haven't said anything about the content of my posts. I thank you for the fact that you were not rude in your criticism of the lengths I have gone to to make my point. Please, sir, give me the benifit of your doubt. Please, sir, I have again and again, spoken about why it seems "so necessary to use so many words to express a simple point". And I have asked again and again, for consideration for the lengths I have gone to. Please, sir, add you weight behind what I have said or express, in a reasoned manner, why you think I am wrong. THINK ABOUT IT Lagos, no matter if you agree with me or not, your reasoned comments to the point of what I have said will have THE ONLY EFFECT I AM INTERESTED IN - I am interested in innitiating a discussion about the real issues underlying the incident of Mr. Hale. Hmmm, perhaps some out there, perhpas you too sir, make the mistake of thinking I want to be RIGHT. That happens a lot on the internet; I have pointed out the negative side of internet discussion and "identity uploading.". BUT, no sir, I don't simple wish to be right - though I am quite confident in my logic. But what I really want us to do it to stop wasting time and getting distracted by the details. I want us to put our intellect and time to better use. No matter if you agree with me or not, Lago, address the points I have made, and then there will be much less reason for me to hammer on and on trying to get the discussion to focus on something real and doable. I do hope you see this Lagos. Say something about the points I have made - agree or disagree. I thank you for your polite criticism of the lenghts I have gone to . . . but, Lagos, do you agree or disagree that I have gone to these length because I am focused on the real underlying issue - in a world where it can take a great many words to make a simple point. If you agree, add your weight. If you disagree, enlighten me.

Jan 29, 2013 19:55 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Do you agree or disagree, Sir: until such time as folks take a look at the real social issues behind the incident involving Mr. Hale and the confused aftermath regarding the justice or lack of justice he recieved no reasonable discussion is possible. Again, my position: it is a certain reality that a lack of RULE by LAW in China is the reason why normal Chinese citizens seek justice through vengeful crime in response to crime - failing to see that this 'crime for a crime' response is also 'lawlessness; the lack of RULE by LAW is the obvious reason why normal Chinese citizens do not trust their own police and justice system; the lack of RULE by LAW is clearly why so many in China seek justice through inflamatory gossip and "airing dirty laundry" on line; until such time as the real issue is understood no reasonable discussion will take place regarding the factors underlying why it is that, in China, those seeking justice and those concerned about the injustices surrounding the outcome of justice proceeding seek the lawless and unbecoming methods of justice they do, such as 'trial on the internet.,. And, in taking the 'trial' of Mr. Hale to the internet it is very nearly guaranteed that the discussion will become distracted, politicized, and filled with rudeness and INTENTIONAL MISUNDERSTANDing. Internet discussions: until "thumbs up" "thumbs down" assessments of popularity are balanced with a bit of maturity people will continue to take part in mud-slinging, politicized, 20 second blurbs. Would even a million "thumbs up" turn rudeness into value; don't the "thumbs up" and the "thumbs down" always fall along the lines of the same versions of that people had in the fist place -- this is an element of "identity uploading". Is there anyone out their giving a "thumbs up" becaue they actually changed their mind or broadened their view after ready a post? Are there any "thumbs down" out there because some one is honest enough to admit they saw, in another writer's comments, the same narrow viewpoint that they had previously held? Hmmm, maybe. I did receive one reply from a Chinese writer who thanked me for adding something to his point of view. I would prefer to get one of those to a hundred "thumbs up" from people who misinterpret my words for their own purposes. And I have very little fear of "thumbs down" from people who say such things as "no one is reading your post and then in the same sentence accuse me of supporting Mr. Hale. The world today, Lago, is a very difficult place to make a simple point unless you are prepared to use a great many words and exhaustive perserverance.

Jan 29, 2013 20:37 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

And, as to my comment about GUEST 7816 who referred to MeiMei as "dear". Really Lago, are you calling me only on the fact that I may have mistaken GUEST 7816 for a foreigner when in fact, he/she is Chinese? But you didn't say anything about how obvious it was the GUEST 7816 was adding nothing to the discussion but only waiting in the wings to add something rude. And, forgive me (I am not a person who likes to jump to conclusions), but it seems quite clear that GUEST 7816 was being very "patronizing and speaking in what seemed like an over-familiar manner so as to draw approval for himself. He just hijacked your polite criticism of the length of my posts. Perhaps you should advise his to focus on my points -- it is always better to assocatite yourself with others rather than letting others associate themselves with you, for thei own purposes. This too, Lagos, is simple more of the same ganging up, jumping on the band-wagon sort of use for the internet from the man or woman, GUEST 7816, who suggested my post were useless because they take "more than 20 seconds to read." SO, I thank you for your observations. They were made politely. Yet, please address what I have writen/said. And please, trust that I am aware I have just now added three or four more posts to my total, again in an effort to make simple points "in a world where it can be often so necessary to use a lot of words to make a simple point." Give me the benifit of the doubt, Lagos. I'm a pretty nice fellow and I think I have been exceedingly patient. I would prefer that you see this side of my character and intentions. I would greatly appreciate that you comment on what I have said and then I wouldn't have to work so hard to push the focus of this discussion to a real issue. And, sir, remember, the implication of you words may be that you have less faith in our fellow netizens than I do.

Jan 29, 2013 20:47 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

GUEST 7816 WOW . . . But you never responded to anything I said. You never once agreed or disagreed with the specific points I have made. Had you done that, why would there have been any need for me to repeat myself. Your initial comment suggested that I was in some way 'misusing the internet' becasue my comments took more than "20 second to read". I very clearly explain why I felt the need to express write in great lenght. You made the assumption that I was motivated by some other reason beyond the reasons that I very clearly stated. Perhaps you think I write just because I want to be right. THere are many writers on line who are motivated in this way -- I have commented at great lenght about that. You mistake me sir. I write because I want to do exactly as I siad, place the focus of this discussion on the real underlying issues. I have asked you again and again to actual comment on what I have said I will ask you again. It makes no matter if you agree with me or not, simply add a reasoned comment focused on the point I have made and there would be no need for me to repeat those comments.

Jan 29, 2013 20:53 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

Guest 7816 wrote: that my posts are "repetitive or overkill with some point he wants to drive home." What is the point I want to drive home? Would you please comment on that? And please comment on the fact that in my initial post I anticipated that very few would want to talk about the real issue, that most would want to continue discussing the gossip and lack of justice or not, surrounding Mr. Hale. I anticipated that, in a society whihc has not empowered the RULE OF LAW very few people would want to, or even know how to, place Mr. Hales' behaviour, and the event following that, into the bigger discussion of JUSTICE IN CHINA. No one wanted to discuss what is really happening. GUEST 7816, you could have simply said "Solhacehabrvida, you are wrong" . . . or "Solhacehabravida no one wants to talk about that." I would have have replied "why do you think I am wrong" or "why do you think no one wants to talk about this." That would have created the discussion I was hoping for. But you didn't do that. What you did, very quickly, was follow along with MeiMei who simply didn't understand, and who twisted my words as though I was supporting Mr. Hale . . . and you told me that no one want to read anything "over 20 seconds". You seem to have very little faith in other people. Here is a test, Guest 7816, the reasonable, polite, and focused comments I have generated all take longer than a twitter post to read and internalize." You commented on the length of my posts but never on the content of my posts. And here now you have jumped in again. You have 'hijacked' a polite comment, from Lagos, to continue your own attack, after you said "good-bye" and asked me to "leave you alone". If you don't wish to comment on the points I have made, then I suggest you stop comment on the length of my posts. And stop trying to use other people's posts as jumping off points for your own negative comments. Lagos was polite; you're just negative. If I were him, I would very quickly disassociated myself from negative comments

Jan 29, 2013 21:04 Report Abuse

solhacehabravida

GUEST 7816: what is the point I have tried to make? Would you kindly respond directly. You call my point, "some point" . . .but can you actually comment on my point, please?

Jan 29, 2013 21:06 Report Abuse