修改铺（要关门儿了哈）——BY 都说了不是又八

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

107# 123runfordream


呃 都说了不是又八了………………

等会儿看哈

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

99# 小黄瓜的解夏



The following appeared in a memo from the mayor of the town of West Egg.

"Two years ago, our consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years.（背景） During the past two years, however, town residents have been recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Next month the amount of material recycled should further increase, since charges for garbage pickup will double. Furthermore, over ninety percent of the respondents to a recent survey said that they would do more recycling in the future. Because of our residents' strong commitment to recycling, the available space in our landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted."
words:659 用时一小时


以下是全文
In this argument, the arguer concludes that the available space in the landfill could last for considerably longer than previously predicted（这两个词可以倒过来）, because of the local residents’ strong commitment to recycling.（嗯，可能的话尽量原文改写一下。） To substantiate this conclusion, the arguer cites a series（嘛，这里要是直接说三个，印象分会提高不少吧。） of evidence including the increased amount of recycled aluminum and paper, the fact that charges for garbage pick up will double next month, and the result of （a）recent survey showing that respondents will do more recycling in the future. However, I find this argument weak,（逗号可以不加） with several critical flaws.
第一段概括原文效率还是很高的。只是有一个大问题：

你画成背景的地方不是背景哈。再读一遍，两年之前的那个prediction那个是我们自己的人推测的。这一点不能take for granted，最好在一开始就进行攻击。

如果可能的话，用稍微漂亮一点的语言来概括一下这三个原文论据会更好。现在的语言基本都是原文照抄，这样不大好。



To begin with, the arguer commits a fallacy of hasty generalization（X以后不要这样写了。从你的固定句式中拿出去。）by citing the increased recycling of aluminum and paper to prove that the total amount recycling of garbage has inevitably increased.（注意看好这里哈：你现在第一句话，也就是TS，说了一件事，“原文这里不对。”只说了这六个字。今后TS尽量说这样一件事：“原文这里哪儿不对。” It is entirely possible that the residents only have willingness to recycle these to materials due to their willingness to save money.（居然攻击了这么小不点儿的一点，挺震惊的。注意读题哈：原文说的是只有铝和纸的回收率很高，它们能占多少垃圾量呢？） If so, maybe they would not like to recycle other kinds of garbage which are cheap and unsuitable for reuse.（而且这里提到了money让人很奇怪。与原文完全无关而且并不能说是最直接的推测。） For that matter, without providing more information about residents’ recycling of other materials, the arguer could not substantiate the residents’ thorough commitment of recycling.（最后这个结论也不好。应该和这一段段首的TS对应。也就是“铝和纸不能代表XXXX”。而你这里套了原argument后边的一句话，和这段关系不大。）




In addition, the arguer unnecessarily establishes a causal relationship between the increased charges for garbage pick up and the increased amount of recycling.（同上。） This causal relationship is based on the assumption that the residents’ would not like to pay relatively high fee for garbage pick up. However, we could not find sufficient and concrete evidence to substantiate this assumption.（这一段直到这儿还没有任何信息量哈。） It is entirely possible that they tend to accept the doubled charges because it is still very low, or even if the doubled charge is too high, they have to choose garbage pick up because busy work makes them have no time to do recycling.（第一点还挺在理，第二点怎么看怎么像没理找理。） If so, the amount of recycling will not increase. Without ruling out these and other possibilities, I could not accept assertion that the increased charges will lead to further increase of recycling.（最后这个结尾句还是没有信息量。这一段的信息量就在中间的两行，而且都没啥太大的说服力。）




Moreover, whether the result of survey cited by the arguer could demonstrate the commitment of local residents is open to doubt. For one thing, common sense informs me（最好不要出现I ME US之类） that the respondents' actual behaviors are not always in strict accordance with their answers in the survey. Perhaps they are not entirely forthright in the survey, or perhaps they agree that recycling is important, but fails to take it as a habitual behavior. For another, the arguer fails to prove that the respondents' answers could accurately reflect opinions of the whole general group. It is entirely possible that only a few of residents involves in the survey, and other residents do not hold the same attitude towards the recycling as the respondents do.（光看你这句话觉得说服力不大。你可以再提出一个假设：如这些接受调查的都是这个landfill的常客呀，住得离这儿最近呀，或者干脆就是一个无回收意识的小区（里头住的全是一帮暴发户懒得回收啦）等等。） In short, without ruling out all above-mentioned possibilities, the author’s assumption remains untenable and unconvincing.（最后这句话都看腻了。请和这段的TS产生关联。）




Last but not least, even assuming that the arguer could substantiate all of the foregoing assumptions, and concludes that the residents’ commitment to recycling is strong enough now, the causal relationship between the residents' commitment and the availability of space in landfill is still unconvincing.（就像在body1里面我说的一样，TS的作用不是“这儿有问题”，而是“这儿有什么问题”。） Other factors could also result in a completely filled landfill. Will the population in this area increase significantly in future? If so, although the current residents’ would like to recycle, the total amount of garbage will still increase a lot. The arguer also unfairly ignores other kinds of garbage except household waste, such as industrial refuse.（这个放在这里讨论就不恰当了。应该放在BODY 1里面。） Perhaps some factories will be established in this area in the future, and the landfill will be full of a large amount of industrial refuse very soon. In that case, even the previous prediction should be reconsidered, not to mention the arguer’s conclusion.（这段有点儿没病找病的感觉。问题不在你找的东西不合理，而在于你论证的方式。一开始你就说“哎呀就算他说的对也未必能行！”然后举出了一些看似很突发的事件。突然修一座大工厂把这儿占了还好，那个“人口在两年内飙升”实在是有泼妇之嫌。如果说这儿突然冒出座火山然后把所有人活埋了，是不是这个垃圾场就没人用了呀。

但如果你这样说可能会好一点：虽然作者列举出了许多因素，但是这些因素都是比较片面的局部因素。作者并没有列出这个地区的整体的宏观的发展情况，如有无快速增长的工业呀，是否是政策人口迁入地区呀，是否是战争前沿地带的refugee收容区呀，等等。当然这样扯的话就太远了……时间未必够。）







To sum up, the argument made lacks credibility as its stands. To strengthen the assumption that the residents have strong commitment to recycle, the author ought to provide more concrete and sufficient evidence. To solidify the prediction as a result of residents’ commitment, we need further information to rule out other possible situations which may disprove it.


自己觉得有一些问题但是不知道怎么解决：
1 看过一些板油对时态的讨论，仍然不得要领，所以就按照一般时态来的，不知道可以不可以，如果不行，具体哪里有时态错误能告诉我一下吗？谢谢

没啥时态错误。

2 字数觉得太多了考试的时候限时不一定能写完，可能自己废话比较多吧，而且不知道如何取舍重要错误和次要错误，总觉得每个都很重要，，，关于语言精简有什么好的意见和建议吗？谢谢


当你觉得每个都重要的时候，就都用差不多的篇幅去说。当你脑袋里的知识储存或者你脑袋里的灵感与文章里某个错误正好对应上的时候，就尽着自己的性子多说一点儿，说详细一点儿。这种【对应】是要靠多练习多找感觉来培养的。自然为之就好。

这篇文章中比较大的一个消息来源问题你就没有看到，这个是审题不细，没练成条件反射啦。当你发现“消息来源”与剩下的三个错误是对等关系的时候，自然就会把这个“来源”多攻击几下儿了。主次错误都是肉眼可见的，不用特地去练那个火眼金睛啦。


另：语言精简没啥建议，带着这个意识再练。而且很多时候写不完不是废话多的问题，而是思路不够通顺的问题。加油吧。

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

107# 123runfordream



173The following is a memorandum issued by the publisher of a newsmagazine, Newsbeat, in the country of Dinn.

"Our poorest-selling magazine issues over the past three years were those that featured international news stories on their front covers.（1） Over the same period, competing news-magazines have significantly decreased the number of cover stories that they devote to international news.（2） Moreover, the cost of maintaining our foreign bureaus to report on international news is increasing.（3） Therefore, we should decrease our emphasis on international news and refrain from displaying such stories on our magazine covers."


嗯，字儿好少……加油练吧。


As the publisher says, they should decrease their emphasis on international news, since over the past three years those were the poorest-selling while the cost for providing for their foreign bureaus to report on international news is increasing.（嗯……这不是原因2么。） The other（another） reason that he offers is that the competing magazines have done on the direction that decreasing the number of cover stories on international news. Also, the publisher suggests that displaying such stories as the international news on their magazine covers should be refrained. （综合看下来，第一段显得很混乱。按照66版的分析总帖，我们已经看到了最后的结论是由三个条件推出来的。但首先你没有按照原文的脉络把这三个作者的例证理清；其次列举了三个例子之后语言虽然不模板但是太口语了。）
It is not sensible to do what he suggests, in my opinion, for the reasons he provides are unreasonable.


First of all, the publisher concludes this suggestion based on the fact happened in the past three years. （嗯……攻击的点非常奇怪。攻击了这个“三年”，并没有很好地WEAKEN掉作者的推论呀。） If it happens on the others（= =好口语！而且others是什么呀，并没有非常明确地指出。）, this may have some connection. But it happens on the information business which renews everyday.（嗯，其实要是花点力气就可以明白，你在竭力说明这个“3年”并不能说明这个poorselling。但是按照这个逻辑推下去，就是说只要是信息产业口的出版社呀报社呀都有一夜倒闭的危险，是么……这里的逻辑非常混乱。） The reason why it is poor selling in the past three year may be others,（其实只要着重叙述这个东西并且合理化就OK了。一定是开始限时，慌张了……） for example, people（问题来了。People要详细说明一下。而且这些人既然忙于生计，为什么他们曾经订过你的报纸呢？不要说因为他们的生活状况集体恶化了哈，那个就是强词夺理了。） are busy with their basic life without much interests in news whether it’s international or demotic, so the poor selling were happened to all the publish companies. Or the magazine itself had not high reputation but others did that people choose them.（这句话totally没看懂） Maybe the most possibility（the most possibility……应该没有这么说的吧。） is that their magazine had poor quality and people who keep buying finally did want that bad quality paper anymore.
（可以看出你在限时条件下非常慌乱。请问这一段要论述什么呢？很简单：3年之内，有什么其他原因可能使得这种杂志卖不出去。提出合理的解释并不难对吧，拿出一两个例子就好。这一段当中你用过的例子并不是那样合理化的。而且最后要用总结句把这一段收束一下。）




And the fact that competing magazines decreased their stories on front covers should not be easily explained（这里能看得出你的语言并不是那样地precise啦。一定是限时限着急了……没有必要说explain对吧。） and followed by the publisher.（虽然这一段只有一个TS…………但是觉得在argument的TS中，不光要说出【在哪儿有问题是什么问题】，更要说出【为啥有问题】。比如这里可以略略带过一句“因为我们根本就没有看到他们在获益嘛！”（原文还真是有点儿脑残，只说“他们这样做”而没有说“他们这样做而且还赚了钱”……究竟赚钱没赚钱都不知道，咱们跟他们学干啥，是吧。表着急）


Furthermore, the higher cost of maintaining foreign bureaus has no directly （语法错）connection with the poor selling and reducing the emphasis on international news could not be the effective measure to change the situation. （啊这句话好混乱…………）The cost may be influenced by the change of economy of which country where the bureaus locates in. （==这句话即使展开也未必非常有说服力吧喂……）




The purpose on making change is to improve the selling condition for the publish company. What the publisher should consider about is that is the style of magazine popular for people? Is the quality too bad to be accepted? Are the contents interesting? Or others more. Thus could be possible to save the future of magazine.（嗯，结尾其实倒是相对挺好的。但是如果这些文字放在中间的话，很可能更有说服力。）

总体看来，如果不限时的话，你写出的东西和这个肯定判若两人。
越早限时越好，不过下手的时候要结合原文，各个击破……把原文这个非常大的东西分成三份，并且分别提出反例，把话都说圆，一篇作文就很好了。




总之限时的确很让人难以淡定……一起加油吧。

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

95# a08805436


TOPIC: ISSUE61 - "High-profile awards such as the Nobel Prize are actually damaging to society because they suggest that only a few people deserve such recognition."
WORDS: 611



Are high-profile awards really damaging to society, as the speaker contends? In my view, although these kinds of awards offer only a fraction of people recognition（recognition可以删掉。表达意义不明。）, the awards are indispensable impetus for people（什么people。说清楚） to strive for their goals.




Admittedly, awards such as the Nobel Prize provide the honor to a specific group of people. When we see the chosen people on the ceremony, proud and ambitious, we should also be fully aware that there are thousands of other scientists, artists and experts working hard to achieve the goal but somehow failed.（话倒不是这么说。Fail需要说清，并不是【没有成就】而单纯是【没能得奖】。） The prizes may dishearten them and thus make a negative impact on the development of science and arts.（哈？恕我愚钝了，这个负面效应真是没听说过……想看看你的例子比如谁没评上奖以后就不搞研究不作创作了……结果果然还是没等到你的例子。） The same goes for the Olympic Games, when an athlete winning a gold medal, it is hard for people to consider other athlete aiming at the same goals. In a word, offering a small group of people such high-profile honor may constitute deteriorated elements to other people study on the same fields.（看了很久，一直在期待【究竟是怎样起到负面作用】的，结果就是没有等到活生生的例子。有实力得奖的人千千万万，但是大家并不是“啊啊我要得诺贝尔奖！”这样从小努力到老。基本上，许多学科的诺贝尔奖需要几个条件。一，这个人还活着。这个原因一点儿都不贫，但是看第二条哈。二，这个人的成果必须在社会上造成了极其深远的影响。绝大多数诺贝尔奖的得奖者都已经远远过了自己学术的黄金期，他们的成果已经应用到社会上几十年了。一帮老头老太太不管淡定与否，基本上都已经没有什么新成果问世了……所以你这个【负面作用】真的很值得怀疑。同样，奥林匹克的例子也是……得第二的人要么下届努力得冠军，要么回去当教练努力教出冠军。会受挫而退出者那是心理素质差……）
（assumption：这一段你是硬按照提纲写，写了一半觉得不顺当，结果还是硬生生写下来了。实战中就算了，未必非得平衡开题。）




However, these kinds of prizes have their own function in the era of our time.（就OUR ERA就得了呗……绕死了） The awards are spiritual impetus for all the society to achieve.（到底是人得奖还是社会得奖啊？） With the inflation and expansion of modernization,（随着现代化的通货膨胀= =） it calls for swifter and more violent progress in both art and science. In order to achieve the goals in our society, we shall set a goal for all the people and thus make our world a different realm of existence.（心态有点不淡定。B1中也看出，你是被奖钓着走的，而不是顺其自然去弄的……而且文字很Chinglish。很多地方无谓地绕口，比如different realm of existence什么的） Nobel Price, known for its impartiality and equity, could give those scientists and artists a shot in the arm. For one thing, such kind of prize helps those people define their social identity and status, which may constitute beneficial influence on the development in specific fields. For another thing, when we see the splendid and glorious honor that the awards offer, we shall consider the enormous efforts as well as insightful aspirations and inspirations in science, arts and physical training. On the level of science, some scientific research, say, the study of astronomy, may take many years' observation and calculation before they reach the truth. In the artistic world, many painters devoted their whole life to the art but obtain nothing till they die. When it comes to athletes, the efforts are their perspirations and zeal. Therefore, we may safely conclude that it is the high-profile prizes that help steer the main mentality of our society.（实话说，这一段看得非常累。没有任何例证，没有任何理由地分成科学和艺术。科学，艺术，体育，等等……都没有说出哪怕一星半点儿的特殊性，甚至连为啥这样分类都没说。这样分类除了口水练习，就没有丝毫的用处了。以上面你说的【科学】为例，他们花了很多年来研究——说完了。说这有啥用？和TS有什么关系？更何况这一段的TS我只读出了“这奖有用”四个字儿，别的啥都没看出来。官话套话好多，但是这段既然是说它们有用的话，就请拿出例子来吧。）

Moreover, the fact that only a few people deserve such recognition does not depress or frustrate average people, but help them to better understand and orient themselves in the society.（呃啊
这个基本上和你BODY1唱反调吧） On personal level, most people do the researches not for the sake of high-profile prize, but for their own interests and curiosity. For these people, the scientific achievements or artistic work alone is their best awards. Furthermore, if people give up their work for the mere reason that they did not get the high-profile prize, it is hard for them to success in any other fields and consequently it is not necessary to give the prize to the mediocre ones. Perseverance as well as endurance is of vital importance in both scientific and artistic fields. On community level, the chief aim of the awards is not to honor the great masters that have won the prize, but to encourage and goad the others that study in the same area. While our world cannot be changed by the elites only, the efforts from all the people can add up to a lot.
嗯，这一段没有大毛病。写东西爱好分类很好……只是要用例子补上去嘛。一层包一层，说得也都有道理，只是语言效率不高稍微有点儿罗嗦。



In final analysis, high-profile awards such as Nobel Prize propel human civilization forward in the course of human history and are indispensable in our society because it offers recognitions to people that gave rise to the development of modernization.（最后一段连让步都不见了……前面的让步比较败笔。）

雷帝嘎嘎UID: 2762504

好伤心的说~
98没抢到吗...

小黄瓜的解夏UID: 2567767

楼主，我看过你给我改的文章了 我是99楼的，有一个问题想问一下。
"Two years ago, our consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years.（背景）
我觉得这篇ARGU是根据目前三个状况推出strong commitment能够让landfill不如预测的那么快的被filled，这第一句说只是提供一个背景信息，在随后的论述中没有出现任何和之前推测有关的信息，通篇都是证明时间被缩短的可能性，直到结论最后这个背景被拿出来又比较了一下。难道不是这样么。。。
这样的话要攻击背景的哪一点呢？

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

114# 小黄瓜的解夏

两年前，our consultants如何如何……这些consultant可能不准。

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

113# 雷帝嘎嘎


= =随机的，不是【抢】。

小黄瓜的解夏UID: 2567767

我明白你的意思，但是攻击了这个prediction不准确并没有涉及到文章论证部分的逻辑不是么
这个argument的逻辑顺序我认为是并列列出三个事实去说明一个sub conclusion就是strong commitment of recycling,然后由这个sub推出landfill会更快的被填满，你觉得呢？
我觉得上述逻辑顺序没有什么点可以攻击prediction的，因为不管哪个previous prediction是少于5年还是多于5年都不重要，重要的是作者觉着这个预测不准并且用他的证据证明了。如果攻击prediction的话不是帮作者说话么？、、、
只是自己的感觉，觉得argument逻辑顺序是我想的这样，所以攻击的话扣住其他比较好，不知道你的看法是？
另外你说的语言上的变化和精准很有用，会注意的，谢谢。

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

117# 小黄瓜的解夏


想了一下儿，你说的对。


首先按照我的理解，argument下面的所有论证都是认为垃圾场不会被填满（可以用“-”号来标记），最开始的那个prediction则是认为垃圾场一定会很快出问题（+）。没有“-”就没有相对的“+”。


你觉得我们都是在批驳那个“-”的方向，而没有必要把另一个方向“+”的东西也牵涉进来。这样会造成自身立场的摇摆不一。


而我原先觉得这个prediction是整个argument的根源，不可不批。然而不是这样的，整个argument的根源不是这个可能不准的prediction，而是垃圾场的实际问题。



啊思维过程可能有点儿绕。总之你说得对啦！

ppa007hotUID: 2756040

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1059454-1-1.html
再来一次...谢谢了哈

britney0915UID: 2760578

谢谢楼主！
TOPIC: ISSUE153 - "Students should bring a certain skepticism to whatever they study. They should question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively."

Nowadays, our educational system focus on the truly needs of individual student largely and encourage them to question almost everything they have learned. Also, we could delightfully notice that more and more successful people emerged and our science developed quickly. Therefore, I strongly agree with the speaker's claim that students should question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively, and with skepticism for everything they have learned. Nevertheless, the premise is that the students have thoroughly understood what they are taught, but not to blindly suspect everything based on no cogent evidence.

To begin with, common sense informs me that everything, even though the thing that has been accepted for a long time may questionable or even wholly wrong. For instance, the notion that humans, even infants are evils as long as they born has been accepted by people for almost a hundred years in last century all over the world. Until the prevailed of Bible, the human equality had been accepted by most of people. What's the reason lies in that almost ridiculous opinion could exist for so long period? It is just because of no one had questioned this notion, which put forward by churches, and accepted it without thinking its correctness. Thus, humans been thought guilt since born for long times. If anyone could suspect and question the church's notion, humans' value and culture would improved at least decades. Thus, any knowledge we are accepted currently may be wrong. So, people, especially students should bring skepticism to which they study.

Moreover, people's behavior of questioning would virtually bring amount of advantages not only for themselves but also for our whole society. First, this behavior obviously and absolutely improve students' ability of critical thinking and voluntary asking, and eventually lead to their intelligence and emotion developed more quickly compared with others who only passively accepting students. A simple case would effectively support this standpoint. Every child growing up with countless questions about why, how and what for almost everything as they could see, listen and learn. This behavior actually improve their intelligence and expend their knowledge to a huge extend. What is more, a myriad of new inventions and opinions were appeared because of they bravely question the former "truth". For example, up until Bacon's time, the Earth was accepted to lie at the center of the Universe, in accordance with the prevailing religious notion that humankind was the center of God's creation. Applying Bacon's scientific method, Galileo question the biased nature of this claim and lead to a significant innovation for whole humans. In conclusion, as the large advantages of questioning, students ought to suspect their knowledge.

While it would be tempting to concede that there actually exist a number of really truths and if we, especially students doubt everything whatever they learn, without virtually and wholly understand that knowledge, it will be waste of many times and lower their learning efficiency. Furthermore, if students not accept any knowledge, how can they have the ability to question other ideas? Even though some intelligent students may invent a system of their personal knowledge, how can they convince other people to accept their opinion without learning former knowledge which being accepted for a long time?

In conclusion, I agree with the speaker's contention that students should question what they have taught instead of accepting it passively. On the other hand, this action should be based on students really understanding of what they have learned, but not to suspect everything without any reasonable evidence and academic support.

binghuoshenlongUID: 2670882

TOPIC: ISSUE77 - "People today are too individualistic. Instead of pursuing self-centered, separate goals, people need to understand that satisfaction comes from working for the greater good of the family, the community, or society as a whole."
WORDS: 530          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2010-2-16 20:58:10

In the statement, the writer point out that people should work for the greater good of the family, the community and society as a whole, instead of pursuing self-centered, separate goal and being too individualistic. However, it is very unfair to come a conclusion just from the superficial behaviors or values which are sometimes just a kind of personal lifestyle. Thus it is a case by case question we should consider all the possibilities to analyses the phenomenon.

In the first place, I concede that some people nowadays care more about himself, such as how to improve the their title in the company, how to make more money even never leave time to have a dinner with their family or play with their children. All they care about is accumulating as much as property to show how rich and clever they are. From this view, the statement is absolutely justifiable because these people totally inverse the destination of life.

However, does the same phenomenon reveal the same motivate? Around us, there are so many people who work day and night, from the surface, they are self-centered, but you will find that what they do represents their responsibility. Because they love their family so they never care about the harsh situation of the work and tiredness. Therefore, the statement simplifies the conclusion just from the kind of goal a person pursues.

What is more, if a person is really individualistic, does it mean that he leave s behind his family and country? In some cultures, it is advocated to be individualistic; because you can study something owned to yourself in the society or the science and even invent some new ideas and findings. We can make a assumption that when a lot of people talk about a research, everyone has his own train of thought, nevertheless in order to get a conclusion, everyone has to make a compromise, which leads to the discussion to be nothing but a common sense that everyone can agree to. Of course, we didn’t cross out all the merit of cooperation which sometimes can make a amazing achievement.

In the development of human’s history, there are so many explorers who believe in themselves and even sacrifice themselves to show what is the truth which however at that time was call self-centered and separated goals. We can not easily judge if a goal is useful or worthless.


When I was in middle school, my headmaster asked us a question that what was our ultimate pursuing of the life which appears to be so old and boring today. The answers are various such as to make more money, to help others, to create a happy life for family and so on. Then our teacher came a conclusion that all we did is to pursue a happy life, easy but thought-provoking. So in sum up, no matter how we show in the lives and work, no matter individualism or cooperation, working for others or pursuing self-centered, don’t care about your goal is separate or long-term, the most important is that we should embalm in our heart pursuing the happy life to make our family lovely and our society harmony.评完之后
顺便给个分，我第一次考gre时写了很多字 用了很多复杂句子 最后分很低  所以现在老实了，用最简单的句子，尽量吧意思说明白

换色UID: 2658709

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... 6amp%3Btypeid%3D101

嘛，突然觉得占座抢摊是看起来很猥琐的行为

换色UID: 2658709

不过我还是来这么做了。。