我好記得當年在城寨完結時，佢當場宣布同曹總割席分手，好難睇，儘管發生咩事，都要先同曹總講聲，唔係要咁落人面，令到曹總好尷尬。

𠎀斯先生講得很公道，客氣，又沒有記之前人的過錯！心胸豁達😁

傑斯先生，你描述了你從你個人的角度來看認為對的事, 這是誠實且勇敢的行為。 我認為您也非常關心成為您信仰的積極見證人。 我完全同意你在這一集中所表達的觀點。

斯叔真係好厚道，令人敬佩🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻💛🍎 我本身周不時聽細良，佢係一個叻人，不過大家可以去聽聽「徐時論」最新講劉氏兩夫婦，好多人同細良合作過，好似女皇，探長，Gordon Poon，曹總等等，但最後都不歡而散，點解會咁？大家聽完自行判斷

「自我中心」，C叔講得真客氣

錫曬斯叔，懂得顧及尊重別人的感受，持感性亦重理性做人處事，聰明易得，智慧難求，桑兄和你都是難求之才，祝身體健康，生活愉快❤

各位粉絲聽聽徐時論分析就知道一清二楚😢👍💪

尊敬的傑斯先生～非常欣賞閣下評論與分析❕👍👏🌟

斯叔胸襟量度令人敬重！ 計算計較個人利益，利用朋友，係人都敬而遠以啦！

謝謝傑斯分享和分析

傑斯你講得厚道客氣，明就明👍

多謝斯叔理性持平分析👍

睇完老徐同傑斯所講, 我相信老徐所說.

謝謝分享,加油傑斯先生,支持你!

斯叔更加識做人，懂得人情世故👍👏

🎉支持快必， 傑斯&慢必.....支持Real HongKonger......支持香港議會.......Real News🎉

支持斯叔 同意閣下分析

支持. 今次花生大了 連斯叔都講, 真係要聽下

多謝！

劉世良做節目👍,但佢個人誠信真係有所保留🤭

今次斯叔叔分享，感覺是學了與人相處共事的一課。

原則同底線真係好重要, 斯叔你真係我偶像 😊

支持C叔😊🎉

斯叔，你太善良啦！條友根本係有心坤身邊所有人。

斯叔、桑普、鐘sir、城寨，都是我追逐的you tubers。其實城寨的小編在留言區做得不是十分不智，叫眾收聽者去 （追新聞）和其他批評城寨的 KOL 留言抗辯。 那同TikTok 叫人寫信去區議員有何分別呢？ 共產黨樂見反共人士內訌，by the way, 溫哥華中僑互助會在這幾年已經變咗質了，中僑互助會的名字都有在2023年10月1日 明報賀匪國國慶的名冊中出現咗。 打倒共產黨、要大家齊心！💪💪

斯兄你真係好厚道👍👍👍👏👏👏🙏🙏🙏

不能因人廢言，時事評論員最重要係立論清晰，能分析時局，有啓發性，其個人生活、私事、性格其實與眾人無關，始終人性之內善惡並存，本性如此，所以我支持各位繼續發聲，真理只有越辯越明，人誰無過，世上不會有聖人（所以需要民主監察）

講得好啱，我都係同你一樣為人想多些再為自己，多謝傑斯

講得好有道理❤

斯叔講得好👍👍👍

尊敬傑斯先生，繼續支持你！

香港書點賺錢，C叔講得啱，2017年和今天已是隔世。

睇咁多評論，斯叔呢個最中肯和合理

贊成斯叔為人正義！做人最緊要飲水思原，對朋反要有道義！可看看過往誰對誰有沒有道義，大家心裏有數！

謝謝斯叔的分享 分析 祝身體健康 加油👍🙏💪

支持傑斯傑斯加油

傑斯表面唔直接講，其實已經側面講咗劉嘅為人喇，為咗局佢過城寨開節目出埋啲嗱喳招

傑斯好厚道同清醒！起碼唔會火上加油，加多把火！

聽斯叔評論非常舒服，唔會覺得你開恆油去批評任何一方，而係用一個好合乎人性嘅觀點去分析件事，唔似得有啲評論員會出盡力咁去打擊任何一方。而你分享自己嘅親身經歷，亦都唔覺得你係想批評別人，反而令我見倒你對人對事嘅豁達

thx

斯叔 言詞誠懇，非常客觀。 同意 讀書人/學者 通常 ego 大於一切，處事欠嫻熟，以為有道理就大晒，忽略他人感受。 斯叔 跑慣碼頭，待人接物自然優勝過許多人，佩服佩服。💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

分析得很好，有時真係有道理唔係啱晒，要董得尊重別人！

傑斯:和意不同無所謂，但互插同路人就有失兄弟爬山各自努的的be，water精神。我支持大家各自俾自己的政見和見解，但請勿被分化-祝平安。

關於版權：不是每一張攝影師影的都属於報社scmp。現在指控是私有USB中而報社沒有的照片。劉一開始就搬了龍門。他說的有版權是慌言。

聽埋老徐個人經歷，細良對人處事和商業道德真係好大問題。 先斬後奏、想借觀眾/fnas比壓力其他主持 。 黃kols入面 佢對我對政治了解多左好多，可以叫啟蒙之一。佢咁樣做人真係幾可惜。一個人可以叫抹黑，一班出聲的話 佢係咪要反思，希望佢知行合一。

傑斯兄，劉細良這樣的人，由開始都已經給我一個很壞的感覺（所以我從不聽他任何的論調），可能我真的在社會滾得太耐了。如果一個立心不良的人，而他又冇任何學識或見識，都只能做出很少的傷害。但想想，如果一個算叫做有點學識或見識嘅人，立心不良，咁就嚴重得多囉。 都係嗰句：「沒有義人，連一個也沒有」共勉。

有d人覺得做朋友要盲撐無條件支持，你做唔到，佢地就覺得係反骨，我見唔少呢d人 斯叔太好人，你真係要小心！🙏

斯叔去到城寨原來係網聚，呢個應該係雨文的問題喎，雨文係keen on 起城寨開咪又叫你上去。 斯叔 講本相册唔會好多人買真係好中肯。老徐、Anthony果的算法，話到$300x1000賺幾十萬, 印一本書的成本唔係淨係印刷廠張單，正如做賣珠寶成本也不祇是鑽石與金。

斯叔你合情合理不要被人擺上枱，我支持你🎉

支持

👍講得好🎉

You & 快必...very good 👍

道理不是大晒~認同，性格也是缺點的遺憾，面面具圓又是否真性情的人可以做到呢？祝彼此共勉❤

Thanks

🙏

斯叔，見到呢2日發生的事，很難過。

❤斯叔令人最舒服❤連講粗口都好聽啲👍👍

閣下評論得最公道

支持傑斯，支持劉细良。👍👍

今日斯叔真係好客氣，好溫柔！講到完場都好似冇講過乜嘢事！只有EE我我！

人與人相處是一種藝術，人相處是一種高深的學問，因為都是一個獨有的思想個體，人性復雜，只能由善出發吧！🙏

一言以蔽之，對前輩尊敬的話，根本就不會將事件鬧大，作出指控來維護自己。

支持快必， 傑斯&慢必.....支持Real HongKonger......支持香港議會.......Real News

Thanks for sharing your past personal experience! You’re very kind hearted. Sure a devoted Catholic 🙏🏻🩵💛🧡🤗

對呀斯叔👍支持斯叔👍 做D100會員, 也是為支持大班(鄭經翰先生)💕💕💕

支持你斯叔 ！❤

Thx 🙏🏻 Uncle C

斯叔支持你

訂閱咗

聲線非常雄厚悅👂👍

北京飯店係斯叔同雪兒開始聽，再到桑普👍👍

傑斯講話好厚道❤

講得好好！

C叔，講得好

C叔講得好好

🙏🏻🙏🏻

🙏🙏🙏

從d100到之後城寨初期都有聽劉細良，但之後慢慢覺得此人及其太太需然口口聲聲支持民主，支持本土，但同時係有條件嘅，就係搵水，從有所謂城寨人開始，不停hard sell呢樣嘢，而且唔平，幾仟蚊，再之後旅行團之類等，但佢所謂支持同路人，佢除咗出把口，佢仲做過乜嘢，之後就再無聽佢而且幾討厭佢，所以我唔同意傑斯對佢嘅評價，呢條友及其老婆，就係一對市儈couple,可能傑斯厚道唔想講咁白啦

👍Support from California USA 🇺🇸

多謝傑斯發聲,依家終於水落石出！ 原來你老闆鄭大奸同中橋xxx係有關係。

無一世老闆及一世伙記

❤❤❤

數年前也不時看劉細良的政評節目，但始終對他保持觀望態度！人之品德操守優劣是需要時間証明的！

❤

資深政策組成員、傳媒工作者、書商出版/印刷/發行，為何没有與當事人訂立白紙黑字文件/同意書？？？ 關於劉先生的傳聞，每次也涉及金錢利益，好難相信犯錯者永遠是別人。

自從曹總做最後嗰集“撈鬆”已經小聽咗城寨亦冇留言 一直都好欣賞劉細良政治評論分析 嗰次劉細良對曹總處理手法實在令人模糊不清&不安！

勸一眾良粉不要太上心， 聽KOL講嘢 ,只聽他們的意見,不要投入感情,你地其實唔認識佢, 佢show畀你睇啲家庭生活亦只係部份， 好話唔好聽佢哋都係藝人,將一啲沉悶嘅理論講得好動聽,佢知點樣投其所好, 目的都係想你哋課金， 係一盤生意。 呢幾年我真係睇得好清楚, 一班扮黄嘅木咀揾著數，例：龍門冰室煮垃圾叫大家食理念，Tommy仔 籌款去賭馬。 所以我叫自己退後一步， 免費就聽,畀錢免問 ,畀咗錢就投入感情,走唔返出嚟, 明知 做咗老襯都執迷不悟。 有啲KOL好明顯係當個channel係邪教咁樣去經營, 不停話自己受到攻擊,唔準自己啲fans去聽其他channel (黃世X最明顯)， 咁樣就可以養出一班忠心嘅教徒。 劉細良唔係第一次因為利益惹是非 ，D100，潘東海到而家陳橋先生事件，其實大家都大概勾畫到佢嘅個人誠信係點, 差在你選擇信定唔信.

为什么在网络上一片声讨刘生？谁最开心

Exactly 😢

👍👍

Absolutely agree with you, although I tune in to his channel I think he’s not easy to get along with

睇過今次事件咁多評論, 傑斯真係最中肯 (利申：小弟連傑斯頻道都冇訂閱過) 有人同主角有過節. 佢嘅觀點係點我覺得都正路 有啲人同主角較為frd, 佢嘅企位喺點我都覺得正常 有時可能旁觀者清 我都認同「理」上係兩邊都企得住 但「情」之上, 真係應該可以做得更多更好，而唔係覺得自己有晒理劇証據就一定啱晒，始終做人有時要諗多步，企喺老人家立場去諗諗應該點做。希望主角經一事長一智，如果能夠不計成本全數捐出，我覺得件事已經某程度上解決到。

👍👍👍

你講得好厚道

我兩個都係fans 什至聽細良多啲，作為聽眾依件事都令到我有啲唔舒服，希望兩邊都可以小事化小 ，BTW 斯叔真係唔同左 以前火爆好多，今日係有睿智嘅感覺 ❤

係囉。你哋要團結啲呀

From a strict legal point of view, Sai Leung did nothing wrong by publishing the book. The copyright of the photos belongs to the SCMP. Sai Leung was authorized by the SCMP to publish the photos. There is no copyright infringement here. The SCMP could have published the book on its own without Mr. Chan's consent because SCMP is the copyright holder. Critics alleged that Sai Leung failed to obtain Mr. Chan's consent to publish the book. Sai Leung said he did by way of Mr. Chan's oral representation. We don't know whether he did or did not. Even if he did not, he was not required to because Mr. Chan was not the copyright holder. Critics also allege that Mr. Chan was "upset" by the publication of the book because the book was published without his input. We don't know Mr. Chan's true feelings toward the book. Did Mr. Chan issue any statement protesting against the publication of the book? If he did not, how do we know that he objected to the book? All we have is a statement from Mr. Chan’s daughter, which is hearsay by the way. One commentator justified Mr. Chan's inaction by saying that that was because Mr. Chan wanted to give "face" to Sai Leung and because Chinese people don't want to air dirty public laundry in pubic. I am sorry. But wanting to give someone "face" does not excuse a person from failing to exercise his legal right. Neither do cultural stereotypes about Chinese people's behavior. The fact about Mr. Chan's failure to take action coupled with the fact that he did put his autographs on some copies of the book could constitute an implicit endorsement of the book, which is a point Sai Leung should take note of should this case come to litigation. From a Chinese cultural point of view, it may be said that Sai Leung failed to show enough respect to a veteran photojournalist like Mr. Chan. This point may or may not be valid. The problem is that it is hard to measure "respect" by any objective standard. Even if this point is valid, it does not constitute an infringement of a legal right. Failing to show enough respect is not the same as intentionally depriving someone of his legal right. They are two entirely different matters. Unfortunately, many commentators have confused the two. Also, many interpretations about Chinese culture concerning respect are highly subjective, nothing more than cultural stereotypes. Innuendos and cultural stereotypes about what Chinese people would or would not do never stand up in a court of law. Also, how much importance should we attach to cultural sensitivity when Mr. Chan was a long-term Canadian resident, living in a country placing a premium on the rule of law? Had Mr. Chan felt that his right was infringed upon, he should have taken action to protect his right. The book was published in 2017. Mr. Chan had 7 years to take action before he passed away in 2024. If he did not take action during the 7-year interval, we can assume that right infringement did not happen. There is a good case to argue that Mr. Chan's family is now barred from making any claim against Sai Leung. I commend Sai Leung for his efforts in preserving Hong Kong's historical record. I don't think he has any ulterior motive of profiteering. This case has been blown way out of proportion. To me, preserving Hong Kong's historical record is more important than protecting the sensitivity of the personal feelings of some people. If personal feelings are all that matter, then museums all over the world should return all Chinese artifacts to China because they, too, hurt the feeling of the Chinese people.

👍

好多上一輩男士俾人坤L左通常都唔出聲，覺得咁叫厚道多一事不如少一事！

認同，劉細良先生對事情分析，歷史背後解釋，自己個人意見，都是他個人表現，不像有些主持只是覆述，完全沒有個人思维，亦很少見他在節目談論或其他主持的政見，各人有各人性格.