返回列表 發帖
回復 72# Kit


    Well, lots of responses, and I think apart from a few that stated pineapple can be trusted, the rest are missing the point.

All I want to say is with all the accusations that people with stronger view points serve the interests of fruit daily or political parties, please also be mindful that there are other interests party like CK.

As for the point made about as long as the person is property owner, the person can represent CK's interests (makes me wonder what about other interests), personally I would not want a representative like that. If we are going to have someone represents the interests of property owners, how can the person also at the same time represents the interests of CK. Which is why, I raised the question about pineapple (and others too), they should declare the interests (or lack of interests) in this forum. It's just like at work, you need to declare your interests when you are hiring, when you giving a contract to someone. We appreciate people who put in effort to serve the community, but at the same time, they should also declare whether there is a conflict of interest. This is a question that is commonly asked at work, and when people raise the question, there means no disrespect and people should not feel offended. Frankly, I am very surprise by the responses here. Why are some of the posters here so defensive? And SUPPOSE (just hypothetically, ok?), IF pineapple comes out tomorrow and declare he got paid by CK to monitor the events here in FC, and would you still give the same weight to the things that he said? Would you?

As for Kit's point of keeping negative publicity under control to keep our property value high, at first thought it make sense, but if you think deeper, it really doesn't make sense. Take the example of the high parking fees. I know for a fact a friend did not buy FCII because of the high property fees. If we don't change this policy, it will affect our resale value in the future, plain and simple. I suggest we take stronger protest to CK, MTR, or the outsourced company, but I know Kit will be against that. There is also a moral aspect to this. The argument essentially means we keep the negative points under wrapped (absolutely NO Media or politicians involved), so we can find the next "water fish" to take over our units. Personally I think if everyone thinks like that, there is really no future for Hong Kong.

As for I used different ids, I would like to apologize and I will use this id onwards.

TOP

返回列表