 鲜花( 3)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
本帖最后由 leohu 于 2011-11-3 14:39 编辑
8 c3 P) G7 G/ s4 m# G- A( j还是没明白你是怎么从“时事政治某个版主不想发表过多的政治言论”推出“这个版主支持时事政治需要一位积极发表政治言论的版主”这个结论的?
, E5 I" c2 B7 A; p- D" w! J# _. a0 P7 i; g9 Y
这明摆着是两码事
& B" Y% ?7 r$ Z. I; M* a$ Ksweetlele 发表于 2011-11-3 14:03  S" s. K8 t6 q$ @2 x/ ?
) j" ^7 T1 x/ s" W5 F
can't type chinese at work,
1 m J3 J: L* P0 t2 a4 N7 r: o; u! k; U1 N" t
"没傻到要在网上正经谈政治观点的地步" and "不想发表过多的政治言论" are 两码事 to me.$ T5 r6 \$ D6 |) q5 K
, J% C+ }) ?8 c7 `6 e7 }% T9 ]$ N
What's obvious to me may not be obvious to you. If I said "1+1=2, its obvious." And you want to act like you are smarter and argue "prove it, it is not obvious to me". Then I don't think we should talk more from there. It's just a waste of time. |
|