Argument2 by WCNK

wcnkUID: 2546550

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."

Through several statics about the price increscent of nearby Brookville community (BC for short), the arguer draw the conclusion that people in Deerjaven Acres (DA for short) should adopt the same restrictions on landscaping and housepainting as used in BC. It may sound reliable at first, but several paradoxes would appear after appreciable analyses.

First, the arguer claim that it is the adoption of the set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted that made the property values tripled in BC. However, the arguer fails to offer us the changing trends of price level. There is a possibility that the general price index had gone up more than three times, which means the property values were actually going down. Thus it cannot draw the conclusion that we can benefit from the policy of landscaping and housepainting

Even if the way of adopting a set of restrictions had really increased the property values, it has been seven years by now. Such method of adopting a serial of decorating restrictions may not fit for today's market. People's taste of decorating and landscaping houses may diverse from each other enormously. Stick to the conservation of a set of restrictions will possibly lead to unworthy investment.


Even if the two peradventures mentioned above does not exist, there is a more vital problem the arguer fails to take in to consideration is whether DA and BC have the comparability. There is a possibility that the people from these two place have nothing aesthetically in common, or some circumjacent condition are far to be compared. History usually doesn't show the same consequence even the causes are the same, well things works okay in BC doesn't carry out equally in AD.

Finally, the arguer mistakenly ascribes the triple of average values of BC to the reason that homeowners of BC adopted a set of restrictions. Many other reasons can result in the increscent of the average property values such as the environmental development or the increscent of birthrate. Or maybe there was a new factory founded near BC that it created a lot of opportunities of employment, and the property price tripled simply because more people settled down there. Back to DA, things would be different. Thus, only by adopting our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in far from adequate to make the conclusion come true.

In sum, if we want to make our property increases in value, we cannot simply copy measures from other places. What we should do is investigate the market far and wide, figure out what costumers cares the most, then set down a detailed scheme. Maybe it may takes more time and money through this way, a good consequence will show in the end.


原稿写的比较乱，早上又改了改，请狠拍~~

cyctUID: 2728144

已改，和issue一个文件https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... p;page=1&extra=

wcnkUID: 2546550

桔子的意见全部采用，并加上了一些整合，感谢桔子的意见哈~:)（注：原来的第四段本来是第一段，后来因为论证顺序改变调到最后，因此思路上不是很连贯~~）

Through several statistics about the price increase of nearby Brookville community (BC for short), the arguer draw the conclusion that people in Deerjaven Acres (DA for short) should adopt the same restrictions on landscaping and housepainting as used in BC. It may sound reliable at first, but several paradoxes would appear after appreciable analyses.

First, the arguer claims that it is the adoption of the set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting that made the property values tripled in BC. （已经剪短）However, the arguer fails to offer us the changing trends of price level. There is a possibility that the general price index had gone up more than three times, which means the property values were actually going down. What’s more, Many other reasons can result in the increase of the average property values such as the environmental development or the increase of birthrate. Or maybe there was a new factory founded near BC that it created a lot of opportunities of employment, and the property price tripled simply because more people settled down there. Back to DA, things would be different. Thus, only by adopting our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in far from adequate to make the conclusion come true.
其实就是想表达通货膨胀的意思，可能表答有问题。

Even if the way of adopting a set of restrictions had really increased the property values, it has been seven years by now. Such method of adopting a serial of decorating restrictions may not fit for today's market. People's taste of decorating and landscaping houses may diverse from each other enormously. Stick to the conservation of a set of restrictions will possibly lead to unworthy investment.


Even if the two peradventures mentioned above does not exist, there is a more vital problem the arguer fails to take in to consideration is whether DA and BC have the comparability. There is a possibility that the people from these two place have nothing aesthetically in common, or some circumjacent condition are far to be compared. History usually doesn't show the same consequence even the causes are the same, well things works okay in BC doesn't carry out equally in AD.

In sum, if we want to make our property increases in value, we cannot simply copy measures from other places. What we should do is investigate the market far and wide, figure out what costumers cares the most, then set down a detailed scheme. Maybe it may takes more time and money through this way, a good consequence will show in the end.

桔子susanUID: 2754084

第一次修改by桔子susan

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."




Through several statics(这个词有两个意思，statics静力学，static一是: heated opposition or criticism，二指噪声，用在这都不合适。你是要表达什么？) about the price increscent（这是形容词，用increase就行）of nearby Brookville community (BC for short), the arguer draw the conclusion that people in Deerjaven Acres (DA for short) should adopt the same restrictions on landscaping and housepainting as used in BC. It may sound reliable at first, but several paradoxes would appear after appreciable analyses.
First, the arguer claims that it is the adoption of the set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted that made the property values tripled in BC.（看过版主们的修改，重复作者的话太罗唆，直接提出错误就好）However, the arguer fails to offer us the changing trends of price level. There is a possibility that the general price index had gone up more than three times, which means the property values were actually going down. Thus it cannot draw the conclusion that we can benefit from the policy（用policy还是不合适）of landscaping and housepainting

没有考虑当地的钱币价值，可能贬值。这个想法很独特，但太偏了一点，如果写成，没有考虑当地的经济状况，可能是通货膨胀造成价格高涨更好。
Even if the way of adopting a set of restrictions had really increased the property values, it has been seven years by now. Such method of adopting a serial of decorating restrictions may not fit for today's market. People's taste of decorating and landscaping houses may diverse from each other enormously. Stick to the conservation of a set of restrictions will possibly lead to unworthy investment.

七年以过去，即使当时实行这个规定有效果，现在也不一定有效。
Even if the two peradventures mentioned above does not exist, there is a more vital problem the arguer fails to take in to consideration is whether DA and BC have the comparability. There is a possibility that the people from these two place have nothing aesthetically in common, or some circumjacent condition are far to be compared. History usually doesn't show the same consequence even the causes are the same, well things works okay in BC doesn't carry out equally in AD.

两个地区没有可比性

Finally, the arguer mistakenly ascribes the triple of average values of BC to the reason that homeowners of BC adopted a set of restrictions. Many other reasons can result in the increscent of the average property values such as the environmental development or the increscent of birthrate. Or maybe there was a new factory founded near BC that it created a lot of opportunities of employment, and the property price tripled simply because more people settled down there. Back to DA, things would be different. Thus, only by adopting our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in far from adequate to make the conclusion come true.（这一段你到底是在分析restrictions不一定是引起BC房价上涨的原因，还是两个地区无可比性。如果是前者，其实第一点的批驳是包含在这里面的，两者合在一块更好，最后那一句结论搬到上一段。如果是后者，前面部分与第一点的批驳合并，后面与前一段合并。总之不要一段分析两个错误。）
In sum, if we want to make our property increases in value, we cannot simply copy measures from other places. What we should do is investigate the market far and wide, figure out what costumers cares the most, then set down a detailed scheme. Maybe it may takes more time and money through this way, a good consequence will show in the end.

呃，第四点的分析还是有些逻辑混乱，夹杂着前面重复过的内容。其它都还好。