已經身在澳洲睇馬兼與馬術界朋友交換奧運情報。週三星島日報已率先爆料我有份擔任本屆奧運馬術場地障礙賽現場評述的崗位，其實自去年「好運北京」香港馬術場地測試賽開始，已知道這個崗位比任何評述工作艱鉅。
須知電子傳媒各有其風格，故在不同媒體，演譯和表達方式可以不同，譬如較自由開放的大氣電波，可以去盡點，在合情合法之下給個人意見；但去到官方崗位，就要較嚴肅，兼且要不偏不倚，個人風格和意見就要盡量減低，所以不少熟悉我的朋友察覺到我在不同「角色」上略有不同的演譯方法。這是尊重場合和崗位有所必要的。
但奧運評述的層次和要求都會更高，因為奧運是公平競技，無論任何膚色和水準的運動員，我們都予以鼓勵及讚賞，就算有失誤，亦不抨擊。總之一到競技場上，官方評述員就要嚴守中立，至於其他商業化頻道如何報導和旁述，就完全由該台的監製就著該台的風格所主導，譬如我在澳洲聽澳洲商業台播悉尼奧運，當然是一面倒幫主隊，但現場官方評述，所要求的水準除了高之餘，評述員控制情緒和場面的技巧，亦不容忽視。
You are absolutely correct. By supporting a lot (as much as possible)
One can ascertain that one will achieve some kind of relative response depending on how co incidental the responsive data is to the attention. If the optimal supportive motivation is relative to the foundation (wether valid or not) a supportive return will follow.
Accuracy is the issue. This is an hypothetical deduction (not quite as comprehensive as educational requirements are about here in North America) but by any of the individuals motive intelligence. Linguistics and vocabulary play the most important part of communication. Gaps of data in verbal communication only provide confusion.
To express anything at all one must work untill one can say what one means in its entirety otherwise one will express a peer groups distrust and desire to avoid the issue. The bottom line is to study practical, basic, fundemental, primary, ground level technicalities of domestic level to know for sure one is known for sure and this aspect goes far and beyond the experience of the
marriage relationship which is considered by most the most complete education for the poor. From your good friend Bruce K. Paxton
