Argument192 高频 超时2分钟写结尾 求砖头 必回拍!

weinUID: 190374

Argument192  第13篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：31分41秒     421 words
从2005年2月24日8时58分到2005年2月24日9时31分
------题目------
The following is a letter to the editor of the Roseville Gazette.
'Despite opposition from some residents of West Roseville, the arguments in favor of merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville are overwhelming. First, residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact when they need a service; for example, the police department in Roseville receives many calls from residents of West Roseville. This sort of confusion would be eliminated with the merger. Second, the savings in administrative costs would be enormous, since services would no longer be duplicated: we would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on. And no jobs in city government would be lost—employees could simply be reassigned. Most importantly, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments as it did when the townships of Hamden and North Hamden merged ten years ago.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer concludes that merging the townships of Roseville (R) and West Roseville (WR) are better than separating, also, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments. To arrive this conclusion, the arguer gives out several reasons and cites the merging of Hamden(H) and North Hamdem(NH) as an example. While the conclusion seems somewhat specific and plausible at the first glance, close inspection would reveal it fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted claims in several aspects.

In the first place, the arguer fails to convince us the merger may provide better service than the separators. Even that some of the residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact sometimes, it makes no sense for merging the township. As to the example that residents of WR sometimes call for the service from R's police department, it is quite possible that R' police is quite more near than WR's to these residents. Also, might these residents be quite few, such as 1 or 2, who remain strange on distinguishing the service. It is not help to merge the townships for decreasing the calling for service. The people need better service no matter confusion or not.

In the second place, the arguer unfoundedly claims that the merger will save in administrative costs. On the contrary, although services would no longer be duplicated, the management cost will increase undoubtedly, while the daily cost might not decrease obviously. Therefore, as the result, the costs might increase but not save. Moreover, suppose that R is far from WR, the merger must buy more cars for their members to service all the citizens. This addition cost may be quite a lot.

Last but not the least, the argument is based on a false analogy. Firstly, the arguer gives no evidence to show that the merger of H and NH has attracted business. Perhaps, H and NH are more famous for their other services, so that the business increases obviously. Secondly, even that the merger of H and NH is successful, it does not follow that the merger of R and WR will come to the same way. It is very likely that, the residents in H and NH are very few, and they are quite close, so it is a good idea to merge; but, on the other hand, R and WR might have enormous residents and they are far from each other, to merge them will be a bad suggestion. Also, there might be many different between R/WR and H/NH, such economy surroundings, economic culture, tourism resource, and so on. All these factors would contribute to attract business. With all these differences, even thought the merging is effective in H and NH, there is no guarantee that it will work as well in R and WR.

In sum, the arguer draws an unwarranted conclusion in this argument. To strengthen his / her claim, the arguer must provide more sufficient evidences to prove that merging R and WR townships will certainly be a good idea.

weinUID: 190374

自己顶一下. 就这么一篇. 哪个好心的给瞅瞅?

weinUID: 190374

哪个新手老手好歹帮我看看啊. 不至于这么没人品吧? 55555 在GTER也少有贡献了的说.

haze1894UID: 185775

Argument192 第13篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间：31分41秒 421 words
从2005年2月24日8时58分到2005年2月24日9时31分
------题目------
The following is a letter to the editor of the Roseville Gazette.
'Despite opposition from some residents of West Roseville, the arguments in favor of merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville are overwhelming. First, residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact when they need a service; for example, the police department in Roseville receives many calls from residents of West Roseville. This sort of confusion would be eliminated with the merger. Second, the savings in administrative costs would be enormous, since services would no longer be duplicated: we would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on. And no jobs in city government would be lost—employees could simply be reassigned. Most importantly, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments as it did when the townships of Hamden and North Hamden merged ten years ago.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer concludes that merging the townships of Roseville (R) and West Roseville (WR) are better than separating, also, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments. To arrive this conclusion(arrive at), the arguer gives out这个词组似乎不合适） several reasons and cites the merging of Hamden(H) and North Hamdem(NH) as an example. While the conclusion seems somewhat specific and plausible at the first glance, close inspection would reveal it fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted claims in several aspects.

In the first place, the arguer fails to convince us the merger may provide better service than the separators.（separation) Even that some of the residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact sometimes, it makes no sense for merging the township. As to the example that residents of WR sometimes call for the service from R's police department, it is quite possible that R' police is quite more near than WR's to these residents. Also, might these residents be quite few, such as 1 or 2, who remain strange on distinguishing the service. It is not help(helpful) to merge the townships for decreasing the calling for service. The people need better service no matter confusion or not.（我觉得这段没有表达清楚）

In the second place, the arguer unfoundedly claims that the merger will save in administrative costs. On the contrary, although services would no longer be duplicated, the management cost will increase undoubtedly, while the daily cost might not decrease obviously. （这句话没表达清楚）Therefore, as the result, the costs might increase but not save(这应该是被动语态吧？而且上面这两句话）. Moreover, suppose that R is far from WR, the merger must buy more cars for their members to service all the citizens. This addition cost may be quite a lot.（我觉得你再考虑一下这个假设，因为假设也得有事实依据，如果两个地方离得很远，会合并吗？）

Last but not the least, the argument is based on a false analogy. Firstly, the arguer gives no evidence to show that the merger of H and NH has attracted business. Perhaps, H and NH are more famous for their other services, so that the business increases obviously. Secondly, even that the merger of H and NH is successful, it does not follow（represent) that the merger of R and WR will come to(come out in the same way) the same way. It is very likely that, the residents in H and NH are very few, and they are quite close, so it is a good idea to merge; but, on the other hand, R and WR might have enormous residents and they are far from each other, to merge them will be a bad suggestion. （这是不是主观性太强了）Also, there might be many different between R/WR and H/NH, such economy surroundings, economic culture, tourism resource, and so on.这一点想的非常好 All these factors would contribute to attract business. With all these differences, even thought the merging is effective in H and NH, there is no guarantee that it will work as well in R and WR.（这段倒过来写会不会好一点/先写地方差异，再写会不会吸引投资）

In sum, the arguer draws an unwarranted conclusion in this argument. To strengthen his / her claim, the arguer must provide more sufficient evidences to prove that merging R and WR townships will certainly be a good idea.

weinUID: 190374

感谢 haze1894.加油.你能行的!

weinUID: 190374

深刻接受修改意见.

关于: 这段倒过来写会不会好一点/先写地方差异，再写会不会吸引投资.

我是这么理解的:先表明,H和HW并不是因为合并而吸引投资; 即便是,因为R和RW跟他们有所不同, 也不一定就会吸引投资.

关于: 距离远. 我同意你的意见,可能我有点钻牛角尖了.

skating_dollUID: 168003

No.1  Argument192 高频 超时2分钟写结尾 求砖头 必回拍!
Argument192 第13篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间：31分41秒 421 words
从2005年2月24日8时58分到2005年2月24日9时31分
------题目------
The following is a letter to the editor of the Roseville Gazette.
'Despite opposition from some residents of West Roseville, the arguments in favor of merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville are overwhelming. First, residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact when they need a service; for example, the police department in Roseville receives many calls from residents of West Roseville. This sort of confusion would be eliminated with the merger. Second, the savings in administrative costs would be enormous, since services would no longer be duplicated: we would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on. And no jobs in city government would be lost—employees could simply be reassigned. Most importantly, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments as it did when the townships of Hamden and North Hamden merged ten years ago.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer concludes that merging the townships of Roseville (R) and West Roseville (WR) are better than separating, also, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments. To arrive this conclusion, the arguer gives out several reasons and cites the merging of Hamden(H) and North Hamdem(NH) as an example. While the conclusion seems somewhat specific and plausible at the first glance, close inspection would reveal it fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted claims in several aspects.最后一句可能有点罗嗦，不过也没什么问题

In the first place, the arguer fails to convince us the merger may provide better service than the separators. Even that some of the residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact sometimes, it makes no sense for merging the township为什么这么说？应该提供证据. As to the example that residents of WR sometimes call for the service from R's police department, it is quite possible that R' police is quite more near than WR's to these residents. Also, might these residents be quite few, such as 1 or 2, who remain strange on distinguishing the service. It isdoes not help to merge the townships for decreasing the calling for service. The people need better service no matter confusion or not这句感觉关系不大，因为前文没有提到better service的问题.

In the second place, the arguer unfoundedly claims that the merger will save in administrative costs. On the contrary, although services would no longer be duplicated, the management cost will increase undoubtedly, while the daily cost might not decrease obviously. Therefore, as the result, the costs might increase but not save. Moreover, suppose that R is far from WR, the merger must可能绝对了点，提出一种可能性就行 buy more cars for their members to service all the citizens. UnderThis addition cost may be quite a lot.

Last but not the least, the argument is based on a false analogy. Firstly, the arguer gives no evidence to show that the merger of H and NH has attracted business. Perhaps, H and NH are more famous for their other services, so that the business increases obviously. Secondly, even that the merger of H and NH is successful, it does not follow that the merger of R and WR will come to the same way. It is very likely that, the residents in H and NH are very few, and they are quite close, so it is a good idea to merge; but, on the other hand, R and WR might have enormous residents and they are far from each other, to merge them will be a bad suggestion. Also, there might be many different between R/WR and H/NH, such economy surroundings, economic culture, tourism resource, and so on. All these factors would contribute to attract business. With all these differences, even thought the merging is effective in H and NH, there is no guarantee that it will work as well in R and WR.这段论述得不错，但是firstly/secondly并不必要，even之类已经足够说清起承转合了

In sum动词，用to sum up，或者In summary, the arguer draws an unwarranted conclusion in this argument. To strengthen his / her claim, the arguer must provide more sufficient evidencesevidence好像不可数，用a piece of evidence to prove that merging R and WR townships will certainly be a good idea.