It is not you that I am worry about. Wonder if 世界日报's editor is on vacation or something. Not sure how these one-sided articles gets published so easily.
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】 who knows, I am not here to judge, nor reasoning..
I don't think that's a one side story. It's a common sense of human instant reaction of sympathy to the survivors of a family which lost a member. Regarding the donation, why are there so many people feel unfair about the money she gets from other people? What good does denouncing her and her family bring to these people? Does the Chinese school accuse her to use its name to collect money? Does it help and in what way to these people by putting her family's private information to the web? Do they just want the let the whole Chinese community to know how disgusting she is? Well, what's the point? If you donate some money, and you may feel sad about it if these stories don't seem fair to you.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 It is not you that I am worry about. Wonder if 世界日报's editor is on vacation or something. Not sure how these one-sided articles gets published so easily.
If it was not one sided, then this reporter either didn't do any homework or have not done any real research. See some of the discrepancy that LS ( xiaonbc) has pointed out. You may want to go to Waterworld to read some of the discussion. The focus of the discussion is more 挺募 vs. 反募, but this reporter turn it into 挺捐 vs. 反捐. Personally, I don't want to say anything since it is none of my business, but don't like it when mainstream media just takes one side and don't report the facts correctly.
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】 I don't think that's a one side story. It's a common sense of human instant reaction of sympathy to the survivors of a family which lost a member. Regarding the donation, why are there so many people feel unfair about the money she gets from other people? What good does denouncing her and her family bring to these people? Does the Chinese school accuse her to use its name to collect money? Does it help and in what way to these people by putting her family's private information to the web? Do they just want the let the whole Chinese community to know how disgusting she is? Well, what's the point? If you donate some money, and you may feel sad about it if these stories don ...................
No interest in going into details of that kind of issues. What for? Even she already has a lot of money, but that can't buy back her husband's life. If she really crossed the line because of money, I think those agencies like the Chinese school will say something, at least.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 If it was not one sided, then this reporter either didn't do any homework or have not done any real research. See some of the discrepancy that LS ( xiaonbc) has pointed out. You may want to go to Waterworld to read some of the discussion. The focus of the discussion is more 挺募 vs. 反募, but this reporter turn it into 挺捐 vs. 反捐. Personally, I don't want to say anything since it is none of my business, : but don't like it when mainstream media just takes one side and don't report the facts correctly. instant ...................
Objectivity in Journalism is impossible. you dont like it, you dont have to agree with it.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 If it was not one sided, then this reporter either didn't do any homework or have not done any real research. See some of the discrepancy that LS ( xiaonbc) has pointed out. You may want to go to Waterworld to read some of the discussion. The focus of the discussion is more 挺募 vs. 反募, but this reporter turn it into 挺捐 vs. 反捐. Personally, I don't want to say anything since it is none of my business, : but don't like it when mainstream media just takes one side and don't report the facts correctly. instant ...................
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】 : I don't think that's a one side story. It's a common sense of human instant : reaction of sympathy to the survivors of a family which lost a member. : Regarding the donation, why are there so many people feel unfair about the : money she gets from other people? What good does denouncing her and her : family bring to these people? Does the Chinese school accuse her to use its : name to collect money? Does it help and in what way to these people by : putting her family's private information to the web? Do they just want the : let the whole Chinese community to know how disgusting she is? Well, what's : the point? : If you donate some money, and you may feel sad about it if these stories don : ...................
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 : Someone forward you post to the Waterworld. : http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/WaterWorld/1878407.html : Here is a pretty objective response to this report: : 看记者这样对网络论坛稍事概括就可以发文数钱，这行业不错。 : 应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深透 : 一些。 : 再说，目前依然針鋒相對的不只是「挺捐派」和「反捐派」，更多的是【挺募派】和【 : 反募派】。刚还看帖子，某反募派在劝挺捐派/亲友团大捐特捐来着。募捐，募和捐， : 拆开来的话。对可能上当受骗的捐者，质疑者，哀其不睁，闭着眼，心被感动，脑被蒙 : 蔽。对自己捐并以自己的行动倡议别人随捐的，质疑者，问其何凭，凭什么相信自己的 : ...................
This article is all subjective. Everything is opinion.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 : Someone forward you post to the Waterworld. : http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/WaterWorld/1878407.html : Here is a pretty objective response to this report: : 看记者这样对网络论坛稍事概括就可以发文数钱，这行业不错。 : 应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深透 : 一些。 : 再说，目前依然針鋒相對的不只是「挺捐派」和「反捐派」，更多的是【挺募派】和【 : 反募派】。刚还看帖子，某反募派在劝挺捐派/亲友团大捐特捐来着。募捐，募和捐， : 拆开来的话。对可能上当受骗的捐者，质疑者，哀其不睁，闭着眼，心被感动，脑被蒙 : 蔽。对自己捐并以自己的行动倡议别人随捐的，质疑者，问其何凭，凭什么相信自己的 : ...................
This person's response was more objective or at least have done more homework than that so call "news report", but then again you can say that is just my opinion.
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】 : This article is all subjective. Everything is opinion.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 : ? : This person's response was more objective or at least have done more : homework than that so call "news report", but then again you can say that is : just my opinion.
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】 : 第一句开头就是主观性，内容全部都是主观。 : “应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深 : 透一些。" : 什么叫应该不应该？ -- The news article you posted was suppose to be "news" not an editorial opinion, no? So, is it too much to ask for a reporter to do some real research?
: “除了，挺，反，还有不少或感性，或理性的中间派。争议中有深度的法理探究等等都 : 被记者华丽的忽略了似的。” : 读了新闻之后的感想， Opinions. -- please read the article you have posted again, was there any mention of this in the article?
As a paid subscriber of World Journal, I thought they have higher standards on news reporting, but I guess I am wrong.
You can definitely write/e-mail to the world journal editor and express your concerns. Let them know what you think.
A lot of Chinese doesn't like NYTimes, CNN, either. It's about where these news agencies stand. I think World Journal is on the right side.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】 : not an editorial opinion, no? So, is it too much to ask for a reporter to : do some real research? : again, was there any mention of this in the article? : As a paid subscriber of World Journal, I thought they have higher standards : on news reporting, but I guess I am wrong. :
聖地牙哥一名華人男子罹患胃癌辭世，留下遺孀和三個孩子，其中一個孩子是自閉症。該家庭悲劇被發上網路後，一些華人自發為遺孀捐款，但卻引發一場她是否應接受捐款的爭議，最後發展成兩派互相對立謾罵，女士的私人信息被公開，備受煎熬。
今年3月，在某華人論壇上，署名lily kang的網友發帖「求祝福」，表示先生突然被檢查出胃癌晚期，生命危在旦夕，只求能撐到中國的父母來看他最後一眼，文章引起很多網友同情慰問。幾周後，網友又發帖表示先生已過世，沒等到父母。
文章還描述先生臨終狀況及孩子們的表現，引起更多同情，尤其網友們得知三個孩子最小的不到兩歲，大兒子是自閉症患者，很多網友發起為康女士捐款，康女士思考再三後願意接受捐款，並公布捐款賬號。
原本一場溫馨感人的活動卻遭到很多網友質疑，最後演成「人肉搜索」和網路口水戰。很多網友質疑康女士到底「是否生活窘迫到需要募捐」，更有人搜索她亡夫工作的公司，計算他到底留下多少遺產，房子可賣多少錢，可拿到多少生活補助，從政府可拿到多少社會福利等。
最終結論是康女士完全有能力負擔母子生活開銷，不應接受捐款。很多人更表示，「傻子才會捐」，「難道你們是要他的孩子們去讀私立學校？」「她的生活憑什麼要比我們的好？」等。有人甚至謾罵康女士和街邊的乞丐沒有區別，丈夫如果在天之靈，該如何難堪，為了錢不顧尊嚴，孩子長大後會恨她等評論。
還有網友搜索康女士亡夫家庭、教育程度，以及亡夫姊姊是某公司經理等，將一切信息公諸於眾，以證明康女士不能接受捐款。接著又搜出康女士到中國「乞討」，「向復旦大學的窮學生們要錢等」，留言和謾罵滿天飛。
不過也有網友表示，捐款自願，無人強迫，何必對一個破碎家庭的孤兒寡母口誅筆伐，應口下留德。很多網友都表示，已給康女士捐款，但完全不後悔。還有人則表示，收到康女士親自寫來的感謝信，「比當年捐錢給汶川地震卻音信全無感覺好得多」。
更多網友表示，可以反對捐款，但「人肉搜索」並公布他人私人信息，甚至其他親屬信息，以證明不能捐款，以為自己站在正義一邊，卻將網路的戾氣發展到極致，反而傷害別人，實在不應該。
目前「挺捐派」和「反捐派」依然針鋒相對，謾罵聲不絕於耳，但康女士卻從3月底就
從網路上消失，記者至今也沒能聽到她的聲音。
Read more: 世界新聞網-北美華文新聞、華商資訊 - 接受捐款反遭人肉搜索
http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_news/22191024/article-%E6%8E%A5%E5%8F%97%E6%8D%90%E6%AC%BE%E5%8F%8D%E9%81%AD%E4%BA%BA%E8%82%89%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2?instance=instant
我倒看到了什么是大多数的人的所谓的正确的道德观念，数目确实不少。
【 在 Vesper8 (天使在人间) 的大作中提到: 】
: 西岸也有世界日报的，康妈这么做真是得不偿失去，可能以后在朋友面前也抬不起头来
: 。
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】
: 很多城市都有世界日报。。怎么老是怪别的人做错事情？当你一根手指指别人的时候，
: 最少三根手指是指自己，可是被遮住，看不到。
: 我倒看到了什么是大多数的人的所谓的正确的道德观念，数目确实不少。
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】
: 很多城市都有世界日报。。怎么老是怪别的人做错事情？当你一根手指指别人的时候，
: 最少三根手指是指自己，可是被遮住，看不到。
: 我倒看到了什么是大多数的人的所谓的正确的道德观念，数目确实不少。
你说滥了，要说为什么滥了。。。就像骂人，你咒别人死，别人真的会死？
LOL..
【 在 Vesper8 (天使在人间) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这个一根手指和其它2，3，4根手指的比喻，也用滥了。
【 在 why2013 (生命的意义就在于不停地问) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你指人都是拿一根手指指自己吧。
学校给的po box不是给她用来在全球捐款的。学校根本不知情，不知道她在向社会乞讨，还回国内乞讨。
中文学校也已经给了康大妈数额不菲的捐款的。所以，在小范围里，康妈已经得到了Q
公司的捐款，并match，已经得到了中文学校的捐款，已经在葬礼上得到了被她广邀的
复旦校友等各种校友的捐款。
康妈还不知足，触角之广，史无前例！
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】
: 谁说的？ 和女人不能讲道理。。。LOL。。
: 你说滥了，要说为什么滥了。。。就像骂人，你咒别人死，别人真的会死？
: LOL..
3月5日康大妈以lilykang来mit发帖，同时以SDmorningday转贴。3月6日凌晨康妈劳工
就去世了，于是来mit更新死讯，同时sdmorningday转贴。
到3月9日，康大妈已经全线推出po box和paypal,同时自己和sdmonringday同时转载到
SD,股票等版，于是好心人在转载。
这个po box，那个中文学校现在证实，不是用来给康大妈进行公开全社会捐款用的，当时只是她自己的邮箱地址，以为只是同事亲友之间的支票信件。中文学校完全不知情。
由于中文学校是台湾人办的，大部分不上mit的，康大妈是福建人，会说闽南话，这也
是她去那个学校的原因。
捐款是康妈精心计划的，不是应广大网友再三强求她才同意的。
康黑的仍没发表?
哈哈
你们看那个ｊｏｋｅ版的八大奸夫淫妇的贴了吗？
Wonder if 世界日报's editor is on vacation or something. Not sure how these one-sided articles gets published so easily.
Regarding the donation, why are there so many people feel unfair about the
money she gets from other people? What good does denouncing her and her
family bring to these people? Does the Chinese school accuse her to use its name to collect money? Does it help and in what way to these people by
putting her family's private information to the web? Do they just want the
let the whole Chinese community to know how disgusting she is? Well, what's the point?
If you donate some money, and you may feel sad about it if these stories don't seem fair to you.
xiaonbc) has pointed out.
You may want to go to Waterworld to read some of the discussion. The focus of the discussion is more 挺募 vs. 反募, but this reporter turn it into 挺捐 vs. 反捐.
Personally, I don't want to say anything since it is none of my business,
but don't like it when mainstream media just takes one side and don't report the facts correctly.
the Chinese school will say something, at least.
又当真，看看就好，何必当真。
福建有不下十几中方言, 康不是闽南的怎么会讲闽南话. 闽南话最难学了. 在闽南上学的人很少学会的. 你要黑她也得有证据.
【 在 mrsdonkey (yaya) 的大作中提到: 】
: 不觉得友情和钱有关系
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/WaterWorld/1878407.html
Here is a pretty objective response to this report:
【 在 whalerider (whalerider (under water always)) 的大作中提到: 】
看记者这样对网络论坛稍事概括就可以发文数钱，这行业不错。
应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深透一些。
再说，目前依然針鋒相對的不只是「挺捐派」和「反捐派」，更多的是【挺募派】和【反募派】。刚还看帖子，某反募派在劝挺捐派/亲友团大捐特捐来着。募捐，募和捐，
拆开来的话。对可能上当受骗的捐者，质疑者，哀其不睁，闭着眼，心被感动，脑被蒙蔽。对自己捐并以自己的行动倡议别人随捐的，质疑者，问其何凭，凭什么相信自己的判断。对自称捐者实际不捐只劝别人捐的，质疑者，怒其何意。对自称捐者不知捐还是没捐却对质疑者诅咒谩骂的，质疑者，忿其何狂。
对半推半就的募者，质疑者，问求必要却未见公布的信息，质疑其募捐程序上的缺失。对爱心泛滥的批量转贴的神秘的“助募者”，质疑者问其到底知情不知情，知道多少内情，质疑者问其能否帮着答疑解惑。对同情心大胜而站台支持的“挺募者”，质疑者问其能否理性看待证据，理性看待猫腻的可能性。
至于，大玩无间道的挺募，反募，挺捐，反捐；以及搅混水，看热闹，让争议不时尘沙俱下。
除了，挺，反，还有不少或感性，或理性的中间派。争议中有深度的法理探究等等都被记者华丽的忽略了似的。
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】
: I don't think that's a one side story. It's a common sense of human
instant
: reaction of sympathy to the survivors of a family which lost a member.
: Regarding the donation, why are there so many people feel unfair about the
: money she gets from other people? What good does denouncing her and her
: family bring to these people? Does the Chinese school accuse her to use
its
: name to collect money? Does it help and in what way to these people by
: putting her family's private information to the web? Do they just want the
: let the whole Chinese community to know how disgusting she is? Well, what's
: the point?
: If you donate some money, and you may feel sad about it if these stories
don
: ...................
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】
: Someone forward you post to the Waterworld.
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/WaterWorld/1878407.html
: Here is a pretty objective response to this report:
: 看记者这样对网络论坛稍事概括就可以发文数钱，这行业不错。
: 应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深透
: 一些。
: 再说，目前依然針鋒相對的不只是「挺捐派」和「反捐派」，更多的是【挺募派】和【
: 反募派】。刚还看帖子，某反募派在劝挺捐派/亲友团大捐特捐来着。募捐，募和捐，
: 拆开来的话。对可能上当受骗的捐者，质疑者，哀其不睁，闭着眼，心被感动，脑被蒙
: 蔽。对自己捐并以自己的行动倡议别人随捐的，质疑者，问其何凭，凭什么相信自己的
: ...................
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】
: Someone forward you post to the Waterworld.
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/WaterWorld/1878407.html
: Here is a pretty objective response to this report:
: 看记者这样对网络论坛稍事概括就可以发文数钱，这行业不错。
: 应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深透
: 一些。
: 再说，目前依然針鋒相對的不只是「挺捐派」和「反捐派」，更多的是【挺募派】和【
: 反募派】。刚还看帖子，某反募派在劝挺捐派/亲友团大捐特捐来着。募捐，募和捐，
: 拆开来的话。对可能上当受骗的捐者，质疑者，哀其不睁，闭着眼，心被感动，脑被蒙
: 蔽。对自己捐并以自己的行动倡议别人随捐的，质疑者，问其何凭，凭什么相信自己的
: ...................
This person's response was more objective or at least have done more
homework than that so call "news report", but then again you can say that is just my opinion.
【 在 auo (aeiou) 的大作中提到: 】
: This article is all subjective. Everything is opinion.
“应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深透一些。"
什么叫应该不应该？
“除了，挺，反，还有不少或感性，或理性的中间派。争议中有深度的法理探究等等都被记者华丽的忽略了似的。”
读了新闻之后的感想， Opinions.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】
: ?
: This person's response was more objective or at least have done more
: homework than that so call "news report", but then again you can say that is
: just my opinion.
: 第一句开头就是主观性，内容全部都是主观。
: “应该是没有经费，不然作为记者，完全可以去搞点采访，挖掘点材料，把报道做得深
: 透一些。"
: 什么叫应该不应该？ -- The news article you posted was suppose to be "news" not an editorial opinion, no? So, is it too much to ask for a reporter to do some real research?
: “除了，挺，反，还有不少或感性，或理性的中间派。争议中有深度的法理探究等等都
: 被记者华丽的忽略了似的。”
: 读了新闻之后的感想， Opinions. -- please read the article you have posted again, was there any mention of this in the article?
As a paid subscriber of World Journal, I thought they have higher standards on news reporting, but I guess I am wrong.
A lot of Chinese doesn't like NYTimes, CNN, either. It's about where these
news agencies stand. I think World Journal is on the right side.
【 在 iamapig (大懶豬) 的大作中提到: 】
: not an editorial opinion, no? So, is it too much to ask for a reporter
to
: do some real research?
: again, was there any mention of this in the article?
: As a paid subscriber of World Journal, I thought they have higher
standards
: on news reporting, but I guess I am wrong.
: