The above news stated an university year 3 student Chu ____________, from Hong Kong Polytechnic University, had posted messages on his personal Facebook account, with foul language. In this case, Student Disciplinary Committee in PolyU has taken action (reported Chu and sent a warning letter to him) towards the student. Chu and councilors doubt that whether the university have enough evidence to charge Chu and the action of withdrawing the warning letter is awkward. According to the news, did PolyU played too excessive response? Does it afraid of affecting the image of the university? So the behavior of withdrawing the warning letter is just showing its responsibility. Or, pressure from public opinion works as an power to force PolyU to do so? Through socialization, we learned that foul language is not a proper language. We can't use it in a formal situation, like in the general public, or in a serious ceremony. We learn these things through different parties, ranking from family, school and media. We learn those so called values, norms and roles. Once they are deeply embedded into our thinking and acting, we know that we can't speak foul language whenever and wherever we want. This kind of sense of self has been internalized, which a long term is processing. In the real situation, we can define when and what kind of language, tone etc. we use immediately once we get into the situation. We could link ourselves to the society through receiving existing beliefs, norms, and values given by school. When talking about norm and foul language, there is no official punishment but exclusion. Norms, the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit. Failure to follow the rules can result in severe punishments, including exclusion from the group. Generally, the way the general public define how a university student should behave, probably the first sp