Issue8 领导者是否应当对公众有所保留 拍我者48小时内回拍

flyfish9UID: 156664

It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public.

*************************************************************

For political leaders is it really necessary or even desirable to withhold information from the public? I agree with the speaker's point only if that the information withhold is close related to country's security. Under most circumstance，the leaders should be totally honest to the public, in order to solving social problems more quickly and keeping public's trust and respect to leaders.

I concede that political leaders should withhold some information if the leak of it may severely harm the security of a country. For example, it is ridiculous for the government to announce nuclear technology to the public. If this technology is declared, it is probably transformed to the countries such as Iran and North Korea, result in a threat to all other countries in the world. In the USA, that FBI withholds many secrets from the public is actually necessary and important, for these secrets are very important to make the States be safe. This kind of withholding is easily understood and accepted by the public.

However, political leaders should be honest enough to let the public know all the information if it is not that kind of secret, as I stated in the paragraph above. This honesty is very necessary, for two reasons as follows.

First, political leaders are not solving social problems by themselves but with the help of all the people in society. If they withhold information, how can they make people know what problems are and help to solve them? A apt example is the spread of SARS，a serious epidemic，in 2003 in many countries. In this period, leaders of some provinces of China disguise the epidemic situation，making people think it is only a  tiny problem. As a result, the disease is spread quickly and then out of control. After that, Chinese government notices the seriousness of the false withholding, then declare the epidemic situation honestly to the public，ultimately solving the problem. In this example, we can see clearly that only by the support of all people can social problems be solved easily.

Second, honesty of political leaders is the most important factor to get the public's trust. We know that the public's trust is the fundament to leadership. That is why after the Watergate affair? Nixon has to resign。If political leaders are not honest to the public, as Nixon has done, they will probably make themselves unbelievable, ending in losing their leadership.

In sum, unless the information is security related secret, it should be declared honestly to the public. If so, political leaders will get adequate trust and respect from the public and better solve social problems.  

pringleUID: 195431

However, political leaders should be honest enough to let the public know all the infromation if it is not that kind of secret, as I stated in the paragraph above.
这样会不会太武断了，可能还有别的情况，比如说稳定民心之类的，就像古代打仗，死了主帅可能会暂时保密。
This honesty is very necessary, for two reasons as follows.

First, political leaders are not solving social problems by theirselves but with the help of all the people in society. If they withhold information, how can they make people know what problems are and help to solve them? A apt example is the spread of SARS，a serious epidemic，in 2003 in many countries. In this period, leaders of some provinces of China disguise the epidemic situation，making people think it is only a tiny problem. As a result, the disease is spreaded quickly and then out of control. After that, Chinese government notices the seriousness of the false withhold, then declare the epidemic situation honestly to the public，untimately solving the problem. In this example, we can see clearly that only by the support of all people can social problems be solved easily.
除了这个例子是不是还有别的可以用

枫丹UID: 166492

It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public.

For political leaders is it really necessary or even desirable to withhold information from the public? I agree with the speaker's point only if that the information withhold is close related to country's secrutiny. Under most circumstance，the leaders should be totally honest to the public, in order to solving social problems more quickly and keeping public's trust and respect to leaders.(句子和句子之间的逻辑的连接不太好）

I concede that political leaders should withhold some information if the leak of it may severely harm the secrutiny of a country. For example, it is ridiculous for the government to declear nuclear technology to the public. Because if this technology is declared, it is probably transfromed to the countries such as Iran and North Korea, resulting in a threat to all other countries in the world. In the USA, that FBI withhold many secrets from the public is actually necessary and important, for these secrets are very important to make the States be safe. This kind of withholding is easily understood and accepted by the public.（个人认为
这两个例子显得有些生硬，感觉只是简单的罗列，最好能展开讲得更深入一些，因此论述的句子应该多一些）

However, political leaders should be honest enough to let the public know all the infromation if it is not that kind of secret, as I stated in the paragraph above. This honesty is very necessary, for two reasons as follows.

First, political leaders are not solving social problems by theirselves but with the help of all the people in society. If they withhold information, how can they make people know what problems are and help to solve them? A apt example is the spread of SARS，最好不要用简写，因为gre的作文比较正式）a serious epidemic，in 2003 in many countries. In this period, leaders of some provinces of China disguise the epidemic situation，making people think it is only a tiny problem. As a result, the disease [U]is spreaded [/U]  （该quickly and then out of control. After that, Chinese government notices the seriousness of the false withhold, then declare the epidemic situation honestly to the public，untimately solving the problem. In this example, we can see clearly that only by the support of all people can social problems be solved easily.

Second, honesty of political leaders is the most important factor to get the public's trust. We know that the public's trust is the fundament to leadership. That is why after the Watergate affair? Nixon has to resign。If political leaders are not honest to the public, as Nixon has done, they will probably make themselves unbelivable, ending in losing their leadership.

In sum, unless the information is secrutiny related sercet, it should be declared honestly to the public. If so, political leaders will get adequate trust and respect from the public and better solve social problems.
观点应该是如果不是保密消息，就不应该保密，但是你的第一段给我的感觉是要论证：应该保密。这样些是不是合适呢？

枫丹UID: 166492

It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public.

For political leaders is it really necessary or even desirable to withhold information from the public? I agree with the speaker's point only if that the information withhold is close related to country's secrutiny. Under most circumstance，the leaders should be totally honest to the public, in order to solving social problems more quickly and keeping public's trust and respect to leaders.(句子和句子之间的逻辑的连接不太好）

I concede that political leaders should withhold some information if the leak of it may severely harm the secrutinyscrutiny of a country. For example, it is ridiculous for the government to declear nuclear technology to the public. Because if this technology is declared, it is probably transfromed to the countries such as Iran and North Korea, resulting in a threat to all other countries in the world. In the USA, that FBI withhold many secrets from the public is actually necessary and important, for these secrets are very important to make the States be safe. This kind of withholding is easily understood and accepted by the public.（个人认为
这两个例子显得有些生硬，感觉只是简单的罗列，最好能展开讲得更深入一些，因此论述的句子应该多一些）

However, political leaders should be honest enough to let the public know all the infromation if it is not that kind of secret, as I stated in the paragraph above. This honesty is very necessary, for two reasons as follows.

First, political leaders are not solving social problems by [U]theirselves[/U] themselves but with the help of all the people in society. If they withhold information, how can they make people know what problems are and help to solve them? A apt example is the spread of SARS，最好不要用简写，因为gre的作文比较正式）a serious epidemic，in 2003 in many countries. In this period, leaders of some provinces of China disguise the epidemic situation，making people think it is only a tiny problem. As a result, the disease [U]is spreaded [/U]  （该为spread)quickly and then out of control. After that, Chinese government notices the seriousness of the false withhold, then declare the epidemic situation honestly to the public，untimately solving the problem. In this example, we can see clearly that only by the support of all people can social problems be solved easily.

Second, honesty of political leaders is the most important factor to get the public's trust. We know that the public's trust is the fundament to leadership. That is why after the Watergate affair? Nixon has to resign。If political leaders are not honest to the public, as Nixon has done, they will probably make themselves unbelivable, ending in losing their leadership.

In sum, unless the information is secrutiny related sercet, it should be declared honestly to the public. If so, political leaders will get adequate trust and respect from the public and better solve social problems.
观点应该是如果不是机密消息，就不应该保密，但是你的第一段给我的感觉是要论证：应该保密。这样些是不是合适呢？希望再讨论一下。

legendhfwangUID: 191674

首先好象有篇文章说学术文章不能用问句，我不知道对不对，只是讨论。
第二段没有标志词，不好，同时论证不充分，只有例子没有论证是不好的
最后楼主是否注意到开头和结尾的论证正好相反？

flyfish9UID: 156664

首先谢谢大家，特别是枫丹是从头到尾改的。
能否提供你们帖子的链接让我回改呢？

关于几点意见，讨论一下吧
1. 我的文章是大否小是的观点，第二段是说应该保密的情况，接下来两段说为什么一般情况不该保密。第二段开头我用了I concede, concede是勉强承认的意思，一般在文章中引出次要立场（我在老外280上看到过两次）。
但是两个网友都觉得有问题，我觉得可能我段落中表达得不够清楚。能否指出我没表达清楚的地方？
2. 文章中的问句。形式不是问题，ETS的6分范文中曾有一片一段中洋洋洒洒来了6个问句！所以主要是看意思是否表达清楚。
3. 简写问题。第一次听到这种说法，想想还确实有些道理。以后尽量用全称好了。
4. 第二段的罗列例子问题。确实是我所有文章最大的问题，但是我也不知道该怎么展开了，谁能指点一下？

flyfish9UID: 156664

沉了，自己顶一下:)

hardbeaverUID: 197443

我觉得第一个论点（应该保密），可以从多方面讲，关系国家安全，保持社会稳定，避免打击民众士气这些方面都可以写
第三个论点可以从取得民众支持方面展开，只有民众支持领导权才会稳固，这些意思也可以写进去，你写得有点薄，是不是时间的原因？