[a习作temp] argument17 [kb9.11] 第3次作业 [复制链接]

To begin with, the arguer unfairly fabricates a causal link that the quality of trash collection service rests on the frequency of gathering trash. Although in contrast to ABC, EZ collects trash twice a week, but maybe rubbish produced by Walnut Grove town per week is very little and doesn't require to be dealed with so frequently. Thus as a matter of fact, residents in Walnut Grove pay redundant money to ABC Waste and that's a really fatuous act. It is also possible that EZ Disposal has introduced more advanced apparatus, equipment and technique to increase markedly the efficiency so as to save working hours.

Another flaw that undermines this argument is that no evidence, ensuring additional trucks EZ Disposal has ordered will be utilized to collecting Walnut Grove's trash, has been come up with by the author. Possibly, EZ plans to aggrandize its business market in other towns by the using of those extra trucks, alluring Walnut to believe that the capacity of EZ outstrip that of ABC.

Further more, no assurances have been provided that the survey is statistically reliable. Although 80 percent of respondents express satisfaction with EZ, the overall number of participants in the survey is unknown. Likely that only a small portion of inhabitants in Walnut Grove consent the arguer's proposal.

In conclusion, the arguer's plausible conclusion is week and problematic for those critical flaws owing to vague, oversimplified, and unjustifiable analysis. To make the argument more thorough and adequate, the arguer should furnish more details about two corporations including financial and credit, and more scientific public poll should be executed. And the final decision should be also in accordance with Walnut Grove's financial circumstances.

To begin with, the arguer unfairly fabricates a causal link that the quality of trash collection service rests on the frequency of gathering trash. Although in contrast to ABC, EZ collects trash twice a week, but maybe rubbish produced by Walnut Grove town per week is very little and doesn't require to be dealed with so frequently. Thus as a matter of fact, residents in Walnut Grove pay redundant money to ABC Waste and that's a really fatuous act. It is also possible that EZ Disposal has introduced more advanced apparatus, equipment and technique to increase markedly the efficiency so as to save working hours.（最后一句谈的EZ的效率好像没什么用吧……）

Another flaw that undermines（好词！我收藏了） this argument is that no evidence, ensuring additional trucks EZ Disposal has ordered will be utilized to collecting Walnut Grove's trash, has been come up with by the author. Possibly, EZ plans to aggrandize its business market in other towns by the using of those extra trucks, alluring Walnut to believe that the capacity of EZ outstrip that of ABC.

Further more, no assurances have been provided that the survey is statistically reliable. Although 80 percent of respondents express satisfaction with EZ, the overall number of participants in the survey is unknown. Likely that only a small portion of inhabitants in Walnut Grove consent the arguer's proposal.

In conclusion, the arguer's plausible（这个词被遗忘了好久了，收藏……） conclusion is week（weak） and problematic for those critical flaws owing to vague, oversimplified, and unjustifiable analysis. To make the argument more thorough and adequate, the arguer should furnish more details about two corporations including financial and credit, and more scientific public poll should be executed. And the final decision should be also in accordance with Walnut Grove's financial circumstances.