Comments on: 我對FES回應的回應 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/ 與你細說有血有肉人的故事 Sat, 26 Dec 2009 05:39:29 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: albert http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/#comment-7871 albert Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:59:39 +0000 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/?p=1292#comment-7871 作為前同工，我對當下的FES有很多疑惑，想請董事及副總幹事出席日後的公開研討會，當面公開對話。 作為前同工，我對當下的FES有很多疑惑，想請董事及副總幹事出席日後的公開研討會，當面公開對話。

]]> By: littleho http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/#comment-7868 littleho Thu, 16 Jul 2009 06:05:09 +0000 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/?p=1292#comment-7868 請FES公開回應，並派人出席日後的公開研討會。 請FES公開回應，並派人出席日後的公開研討會。

]]> By: Sindy http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/#comment-7867 Sindy Thu, 16 Jul 2009 05:31:58 +0000 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/?p=1292#comment-7867 更可怕是, FES在這一刻以沉默及轉移視線作回應。 更可怕是, FES在這一刻以沉默及轉移視線作回應。

]]> By: 阿公 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/#comment-7866 阿公 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:29:49 +0000 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/?p=1292#comment-7866 作為胡金榮的友人及FES的長期支持者，肥榮這篇文章可謂說出了我的心聲。我希望FES明白，現在我們要討論的事已經不是胡金榮個人的事，更不是該篇文章的文責問題。事情的發生和FES的回應對於我們這批在FES成長的弟兄姊妹來說，是引爆了一些我們在這幾年和機構一起同行的疑惑。 非常希望FES可以在公開的場合回應我們的問題，更期望機構可以堅持異像，引領每一代學生基督徒反思信仰，無懼批判式思維。 作為胡金榮的友人及FES的長期支持者，肥榮這篇文章可謂說出了我的心聲。我希望FES明白，現在我們要討論的事已經不是胡金榮個人的事，更不是該篇文章的文責問題。事情的發生和FES的回應對於我們這批在FES成長的弟兄姊妹來說，是引爆了一些我們在這幾年和機構一起同行的疑惑。
非常希望FES可以在公開的場合回應我們的問題，更期望機構可以堅持異像，引領每一代學生基督徒反思信仰，無懼批判式思維。

]]> By: johnny http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/#comment-7865 johnny Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:14:33 +0000 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/?p=1292#comment-7865 To: 過客 Are you working in the FES? If you are, I am surprised that you still don't get it. I suggest you read the third paragraph again. To put it simply, the tone of the original interview changes after the editing. Did FES do this for pleasing China? ************************ Do they publish the original version? No. Do they post the hyperlink of the full version? No. Do they give reasons of editing the interview? No. It is not an apology. It is a spin! Very clever and very silly. If a reader of "Issue 407" and "Issue 408" has not read the original version, he/she may notice the apology and perhaps consider the whole thing a minor issue. Isn't it clever? But, in the age of web 2.0, what can hide? To: 過客

Are you working in the FES? If you are, I am surprised that you still don’t get it. I suggest you read the third paragraph again.

To put it simply, the tone of the original interview changes after the editing.

Did FES do this for pleasing China?

************************
Do they publish the original version? No.
Do they post the hyperlink of the full version? No.
Do they give reasons of editing the interview? No.

It is not an apology. It is a spin! Very clever and very silly.

If a reader of “Issue 407″ and “Issue 408″ has not read the original version, he/she may notice the apology and perhaps consider the whole thing a minor issue. Isn’t it clever?

But, in the age of web 2.0, what can hide?

]]> By: 過客 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/%e6%88%91%e5%b0%8dfes%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89%e7%9a%84%e5%9b%9e%e6%87%89/#comment-7864 過客 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:29:54 +0000 http://doctorfat.wordpress.com/?p=1292#comment-7864 這個改動，會否更好？ 修正及致歉 上期(407期)通訊封面文章「對談國民身分與六四」，我們將最後三段本屬受訪者胡金榮弟兄的分享，誤編為訪問同工的總結，為此錯誤我們謹向胡弟兄及關心此事的弟兄姊妹致歉。另胡弟兄認為編輯後的文稿版本未完全反映他對有關課題的思路與意見，為此失責我們再向胡弟兄及關心此事的弟兄姊妹致歉。 我們尊重胡弟兄對刊出文稿的理解，有關文章一切內容，都歸屬我們的文責。 xyz通訊編輯委員會 這個改動，會否更好？

修正及致歉
上期(407期)通訊封面文章「對談國民身分與六四」，我們將最後三段本屬受訪者胡金榮弟兄的分享，誤編為訪問同工的總結，為此錯誤我們謹向胡弟兄及關心此事的弟兄姊妹致歉。另胡弟兄認為編輯後的文稿版本未完全反映他對有關課題的思路與意見，為此失責我們再向胡弟兄及關心此事的弟兄姊妹致歉。

我們尊重胡弟兄對刊出文稿的理解，有關文章一切內容，都歸屬我們的文責。

xyz通訊編輯委員會

]]>