毫无疑问,《农民文摘》在农村读者中是有着深厚基础的,“众矢之的”栏收到的大量来稿便是证明。这些来稿者犹如刊物本身一样朴实、敦厚,他们实话实说,长话短说,开门见山,一语中的。从这些来稿,可以看出农民读者对自己的刊物的厚爱;但由于多属“一句话评论”,这就给选稿带来了麻烦,有些意见因此未能反映到版面上来。 《农民文摘》的文章短小精悍,实用性很强,其中涉及不少农业技术问题。有些来稿就某些问题展开讨论,遗憾的是,编者在这方面纯属外行,虽经请教专家,还是不敢遽下断论,为谨慎起见,有些意见也未能反映到版面上来。 如果因为以上原因,本轮战斗的战绩反映得不够充分的话,编者谨在此向作者、读者告罪;而明知来稿不一定能采用,广大读者仍一如既往,积极参战,本栏来稿源源不断,编者谨在此再次向读者、作者致谢。 There is no doubt that “peasant digest” has a profound foundation in rural readership, and a large number of manuscripts received in the columns of “targets of public criticism” prove it. These contributors are just as simple and honest as the publications themselves. They tell the truth, make a long story short, come straight to the point. From these contributions, we can see the peasant readers’ love of their publications. However, because they are mostly “one-sentence comments,” they bring troubles to the manuscripts and some of them fail to be reflected in the layout. “Peasant Digest” article short and pithy, practicality is very strong, which involves a lot of agricultural technology issues. Some contributions have been discussed on certain issues. Unfortunately, the editors are purely laymen in this field. Although they were consulted by experts, they still did not dare to make any judgment. For reasons of caution, some opinions were not reflected in the layout. If for these reasons, the battle records in this round have not been fully reflected, the editors would like to take the matter to the authors and readers. However, knowing that the manuscripts will not necessarily be adopted, the majority of readers will continue to participate in the war. The contributions in this column are endless. Here again to the reader, the author thanks.