issue70 留链接互拍

fxismonkUID：2137137

请各位帮忙看看！另：同主题可以留下链接互拍，互相进步！


position: 不同意。对于是否应该5年一换领导应该视具体的情况来判定。
1,在那些需要长期进行的项目中，应该保持领导的稳定性，频繁更换领导不利于政策的贯彻实行。
2，对于一般的岗位来说，老领导比起新领导有很多优势。
3，但是更换新领导可以为团队注入新的活力，激发员工的热情，防止腐败。

OPIC: ISSUE70 - "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
WORDS: 528          TIME: 上午 04:39:26          DATE: 2006-7-15

Leaders who establish the main developing direction, constitute the cardinal principle and manage the team members play a vital role in professions. Some people believe that those who charge of power in any vocation should be changed every five years so as to benefit the long development of the group. In my opinion, that depends on different conditions.

First of all, leadership should be stable in those projects that need much time to finish. On the one hand, there is no any advantage for the long-term proposals to change the leadership frequently and this action will only hinder the coherence of the plan. For example, the public in my hometown elects the local government annually. The main policy of the government in the last year was to construct the city, hence spend much money in building a park. However, the government this year switched the finance to the education and public health, and the project of building the park had to be suspended. Therefore, it is the alteration of leadership that leads to the fail of the project. On the other hand, the stable leadership is able to bring the steady team, execute the initial scheme all the time, and get the ultimate success consequently. For instance, the Windows 2003 Operating System developed by Microsoft company cost thousands of programmers to work together. The leader of the enormous project, Mark Lucovsky, directed the progress from the beginning to the end. The success of the system cannot be considered unrelated to the leader's strong and firm volition. From the evidences above, we can imagine how important the stable leadership is.

Secondly, the old leaders excel the new ones in general works. In the first place, the valuable experience possessed by old leaders who have the ability to deal with the problem composedly and dispassionately contributes to avoid and solve many mistakes in the work. On the contrary, the new is hardly to settle the trouble down when encountering the matter for the first time. In the second place, the old leaders usually get along with other groups of same business for a long time. Therefore, the friendly relationship with them helps more easily to obtain aid and cooperation. Last but not least, the old leaders are aware of the character and skills of every subordinate more than the new, thus can arrange every subordinate on the most suitable position.

Nevertheless, leaders should be changed regularly in the positions-those tend to be corrupt or need creativities and vitalities. For instance, the president of bank is so powerful that in China two presidents in different city have to exchange their positions to avoid the bribery. Another example also illustrates this point that changing leaders is often used to be a way to bring fresh air into the entertainment program.

In conclusion, the aim of changing leaders is to obtain a better development of the profession. Thereby, why must the excellent leader who does a good job step down after five years? On the other hand, if the leader cannot bring the group a better future, to promote a new one may be a good choice to improve the professional condition.

runningpiggyUID：194977

坐坐。。

bighitUID：2230990

55555555555
我在他前面的....占到位了，我电脑出问题了，不能打开网页....所以没办法编辑....
不会就不算我了吧....哭了....斑斑.....？-？

fxismonkUID：2137137

多谢斑竹啊，呵呵，辛苦了。
bighit别哭啊，你的文章是哪篇，留下链接大家互相看看吧，：）

runningpiggyUID：194977

Leaders who establish the main developing direction,[如果这里加逗号，那在who之前也要加一个，另外，说实在的，这个定从的内容跟后面太接近了点，不太好] constitute the cardinal principle and manage the team[member就够了，不用team] members[to] play a vital role in professions. Some people believe that those who [are in]charge of power in any vocation should be changed every five years so as to benefit the long development of the group. In my opinion, that depends on different conditions.[这个观点出来得不好，it depends谁都知道，可depend的情况应该用较为简练的语句写出来，不然就等于没说观点是什么，还有就是我觉得前面介绍背景那句还是多了点]

First of all, leadership should be stable in those projects that need much time to finish.[很好，简练] [如果能在on one hand前面简略地介绍对比的这两部分内容那就perfect了]On the one hand, there is no[not或者不要any] any advantage for the long-term proposals to change the leadership frequently and this action will only hinder the coherence of the plan. For example, the public in my hometown elects the local government annually.[我觉得举例后面的这句不好，感觉是跟前面的内容关联不大] The main policy of the government in the last year was to construct the city, hence spend much money in building a park. However, the government this year switched the finance to the education and public health, and the project of building the park had to be suspended.[篇幅太长了，我认为需要缩减，把时间留给真正的论述。而且这句话我建议用while连接，然后前后用一致的句式来写以突出对比] Therefore, it is the alteration of leadership that leads to the fail[failure] of the project. On the other hand, the stable leadership is able to bring the steady team[能带来还是能带领steady team，我感觉是前者，但如果真的是前者，那这样写就不对了], execute the initial scheme all the time[有点太绝对了，太绝对的话会给人不好的印象的], and get[晕，get都出来了，换个牛一点的词吧，obtain，attain之类的都好啊] the ultimate success consequently. For instance, the Windows 2003 Operating System developed by Microsoft company[company多余] cost[似乎用cost不太好] thousands of programmers to work together. The leader of the enormous project, Mark Lucovsky, directed the progress from the beginning to the end. The success of the system cannot be considered unrelated to the leader's strong and firm volition.[跟leader是有关，可怎么不说到你要说得那个方面去？你要说的应该是the stablization of the leadership吧？] From the evidences[evidence好像不可数] above, we can imagine how important the stable leadership is.[这个结尾太次了，写这么长一大段都不弄个好点的结尾，多可惜啊。还有你说from the evidence可以知道stable leadership的重要，怎么知道的？最好能具体点，这句话说得太空洞了。写完这个之后还要加个结尾，就是简要总结一下你这段说的内容]

Secondly, the[the多余] old leaders excel the[同前面] new ones in general works. In the first place, the valuable experience possessed by old leaders who have the ability to deal with the problem composedly and dispassionately contributes to avoid and solve[avoid mistakes and solve problems] many mistakes in the work. On the contrary, the new[确实有这种写法，可为什么不用一下红宝里面那几个新手的词，tyro，neophyte等等] is hardly to settle the trouble down when encountering the matter for the first time. In the second place, the[不要] old leaders usually get along with other groups of [the]same business for a long time. Therefore, the friendly relationship with them helps more easily[这里表述也不好，renders them to obtain the aid and cooperation more easily比较好] to obtain aid and cooperation. Last but not least, the[不要] old leaders are aware of the character and skills of every subordinate more than the new, thus can arrange every subordinate on the most suitable position. [其实我挺赞赏你把论述的点从原来的地方转移到现在这个比较好说的新老手的问题的，不过这里面问题还是存在。分了三个方面来说老手的好之后，是不是应该在后面来个综述，把前面这三点统领起来证明你一开始说的观点呢？另外就是你的TS句，很简单，清晰，这点我很喜欢，不过我认为如果在TS的后面加上一个状语，插三个短语来介绍一下后面的三个方面，那就更好了]

Nevertheless, leaders should be changed regularly in the positions-those [that]tend to be corrupt[过去分词] or need creativities and vitalities[这两个词绝对都是不可数的]. For instance, the president of bank is so powerful that in China two presidents in different city[复数] have to exchange their positions to avoid the bribery. Another example also illustrates this point that changing leaders is[are] often used to be a way to bring fresh air into the entertainment program. [前面的例子不错，后面这个会不会太抽象了点？而且你说的两个例子写完就结束了，实在有点突然，为什么不说说这例子跟你的分论点有啥关系，大家并不是看了例子就知道这例子能证明你的观点的]

In conclusion, the aim of changing leaders is to obtain a better development of the profession. Thereby, why must the excellent leader who does a good job step down after five years?[尽量不要用问句来证明你的观点] On the other hand, if the leader cannot bring the group a better future, to promote a new one may be a good choice to improve the professional condition. [挺好的结尾，提出了建议]


[总体来说，文章算是不错的，问题是，第一个篇幅没有很好的驾驭，第一个分论点写那么长，却没有个结尾，实在是有点匪夷所思。文章结构需要加强，逻辑也是，逻辑上做的很好的是每当你要证明一个问题，总能分几个方面去说。不过分完几个方面，思维发散开去之后，就要把思维收回来，把几个方面都归回你的论点上。语言上问题最小，需要做的就是学学怎么写些比较闪光的句子]