新GRE argument3 求拍 先谢过大家啦~感激不尽

璐冰雪儿UID: 3156913

题目：
Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
提纲：
1、作者假定商业的下降是因为滑板使用者的增加，可能是因为Central Plaza的租金太高，或者来此处购物的人流量少，导致效益不好。或者作者倒置了因果关系，是因为玩滑板的人看到这里广场人少，所以才来这里玩滑板的。
2、作者假定了垃圾和破坏公物的行为是玩滑板的人造成的，证据不充分，如果有监控录像对此事情做出精确的统计，才可以充分说明破坏公物的主要是玩滑板的人，有可能是shop owners破坏的，或者有游客来这里参观旅游，不小心破坏的。
3、作者建议应该禁止在此处玩滑板，那么是否没有人在这里玩滑板了，此处就恢复了往日的繁荣呢，这里没有直接的因果关系，可能平时来这里消费较多的人大多数就是这些玩滑板的人，也有可能这里物价比较高，人们会选择去物价相对便宜的地方购物，所以就算是禁止玩滑板，也不会有太多的人过来购物。
正文：
  In this argument the author points out the decease in Central Plaza business is due to the increased number of the skateboard users in Plaza.To support the conclude ,the author claims that the litter and vandalism also increased dramatically throughout the Plaza, and suggest the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza.However, several unconvincing assumptions render the argument unpersuasive as it stands.
  The author provides no evidence that the decreased business is result from the increased number of the skateboard users.It is possible that the rental is high in Plaza and the profile is very small, so the shop owners choose to other places to set up a store.The author also ignores a problem,maybe the popularity in Plaza is very few originally,thus make the number of skateboard users more and more rather than, as the author claims that the cause of increased popularity of skateboard users.So the author should provide compelling evidence to affirm this assumption.
  The author assumes that the dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the Plaza is due to the skateboard users.But no evidence prove this assumption is credible.It is much more possible that the shopper owners thrown the litter or the visitors come here to make a tour and break the public without careful.If there is a surveillance video, the author can record which group of people make the most destroy, and give a accurate data because the quantitative data has more convincingness.Without eliminate the possibility, we cannot accept the conclude.
  The author recommends that the city prohibit skateboarding, is it if we do that Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels?It does not have specific consequence.Maybe most of the customers are the skateboard users or the price of the products are higher than other places so even if the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza the number of the shoppers could not increase.Until the author provides further evidence to exclude all the concerns, it is unfounded to reach the conclusion involved in the argument.
  In sum, the evidence is not convincing.To have the predicted result the author should provide clear statistical evidence.If the author give more factors and more compelling evidence, the argument will be more credibility and logically acceptable.