文章

20060523網摘 – 濕地公園新屎坑

濕地公園新屎坑

巴士阿叔繼續來

IT界之匪夷所思

香港動畫

回應

  1. Yes. While nowadays 網摘 has become a great competitors for these article-collecting website, 數位文化誌 success by carefully choose the articles. Although there are not much articles on the site, but they are very valueable.

  2. 可能是對號入座,總覺得頭幾段是講我這些人 — [無力評論,有心搞事]。

    思考兄又怎樣看動漫評論呢?

  3. Actually the main reason that I write critics or introductions is not aiming at some great visions. The main driving force is that I simply want to express my view and opinion on particular piece of work, artist, phenomenon etc.

    Anyway, if we look at the whole culture, these articles will surely enrich it. The value of these articles is that they reflect different point of views from different people to the culture. Both phenomenon critics and work critics are valueable. A culture is contributed by different people, not just the artist, distributors, companies, but also customers, readers and even outsiders who write these articles. A culture can only become more and more popular and interesting by more and more people involving it.

    Also, if we want to grade the value these articles, I think we should judge on their expressiveness. If one can express his/her opinion and critics well, then it is a good articles, and do better in enriching the culture. The content and view point of the articles doesn't reflects whether the articles is good or not, when we are talking about its value. And of course, we should bare in mind that ‘good' and ‘bad' is not a '1 or 0' situation, and all of these articles have value and contribute in enriching and building the culture.

    Further more, we should not be rude to others articles. We should always remember that no one write perfect articles, and everyone has been a newbie. Only discussion and exchanging ideas can let us learn more.

    Oops, sorry that I don't have chinese input here… (SHB123)

  4. 基本上都十分同意你所講的,評論很應該多元化,但也切忌膚淺,消費式「我覺得好唔好睇」的評論,只可視作個人感情宣洩,但卻沒有個人見解在其中。

*