"Prudence; see the essence through the phenomenon, here is the lack of boats and the crossing of people"
If there is a mistake, admit it.
If you don't know a thing thoroughly.
And hastily made a judgment.
But the truth may not be that simple.
So what needs to be done is not to suppress and cover the speech.
The first thing to do is at least make an apology.
In the Sherlock series.
If Moriarty is a genius at criminal skills.
So Charles Augustus Magnussen.
Undoubtedly, it is a deceitful fraudster who understands people's hearts.
There is one sentence that makes a lot of sense.
"I don't need evidence, I just want to let public opinion out."
Absence:
Previously, Wuhan, Hubei.
Some netizens broke the news that students were participating in off-campus training winter camps.
Accidentally smashed 1.3 million yuan of cultural relics in the museum.
Then this matter was forwarded by the media, and public opinion began to ferment slowly.
But because everyone focuses on the value of "1.3 million".
So some key information was overlooked.
How did this value come about?
Whether it was said by the museum or by the people leading the team.
Or is it the subjective speculation of others?
Compared with training institutions, everyone gave more artillery fire to the museum.
For that.
Some netizens made a personal point of view of the matter. (According to the comprehensive collation of the reply, there are deletions)
The first is a unified response to several issues of concern.
First, the town tomb figurines (damaged items) are not 1.3 million.
Second, the one who called the police is not a museum.
Third, there are no extortion institutes and parents of children in the museum.
Fourth, at present (January 26, as of the netizen's message) is still in the negotiation stage.
Then there's the elaboration.
*Origin of the figure of 1.3 million value.
According to the recording certificate of the child's father.
"You hit 100,000 first, and this broken item is worth 1.3 million"
And the museum's curator and netizens who experienced the event who issued a response said.
"There's not a single price number."
*The museum is also the injured party
The netizen said that the museum has a responsibility, and the museum will bear it.
But that doesn't mean they have to bear all the responsibilities.
Viewer-side.
Whether private or public.
A public place of special significance such as a museum.
There should also be relevant civilized and polite behavior.
Not at home, can be unrestrained.
Fights, crazy runs, play, these are all things that should be paid attention to.
This is a museum not a playground.
And the "no touch" sign is also available.
Lead the teacher aspect.
A winter camp like this does have part of its function to expose children to the world of flowers and flowers.
Practice and relax.
At the same time, there is also a part of the parents in the vicinity.
"Just watching the kids"
But when you look at the child, you must also take a considerable amount of energy.
Precautions in a museum.
And maintaining the corresponding order, this is not a harsh demand, right?
This is a matter of taking a salary and should be included.
The netizen believes that the museum is also the victim, of course, the broken clay figurines are also.
However, in the view of this netizen, public opinion is mostly one-sided accusations against the museum.
*Closure is not a evasion of responsibility
The museum is closed because there is no one in the museum.
I bought a train ticket early to prepare to return home on January 26.
It is not to evade responsibility.
According to the netizen.
"The parents and the museum have never agreed to interview any media outlets to report on the incident"
According to her reply.
The value of the amount of the object will not be too high, and it is within the range that everyone can accept.
What needs to be negotiated is the percentage of the amount of compensation.
In fact, this is very correct, and it cannot be said that it is only the responsibility of whom.
Rather, it is necessary to carry out dialectical analysis and analysis of events.
Get a reasonable, normal result.
"Without investigation, there is no voice"