儘管我不贊同佔中行動，也對部分參與運動的牽頭人的居心頗有懷疑。不過雖然不贊同行動，卻對學生在過程中的行為十分讚賞。
第一是行動過程中必有大量垃圾，他們每晚都自發執拾妥當，部分更有垃圾分類，十分環保，十分文明。
其次雖無部分牽頭人劍拔弩張，態度囂張，不少在場學生卻甚有人情味。黃色暴雨時替警員遮雨，也與駐守警員有講有笑。大家都是香港人，都互相尊重彼此的政見和崗位。
外國傳媒用「雨傘革命」去形容這次行動，但其實是用錯詞語，今次行動不是推翻中國政權或香港政府，只是要求「改革」Reform，而不是革命Revolution。可能有外國勢力希望香港革命，但這根本是不可能。
香港人在今次事件上，行為成熟兼得體，不像外國暴徒般砸搶燒。外國應予學習！
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
