argument17【0710G-小猪快跑小组】第2次作业 by frecklewang ，希望大家猛拍哈

frecklewang1984UID: 2355474

日期：2007-07-21    时间：2hrs     字数：617

很挫，第二次写仍然用了这么长时间:(  大家帮帮我吧

17.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."

The arguer evaluates that the proposal for Walnut Grove's town council to change from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste is wrong, just based on the frequency of collected trash in a week, additional trucks, and a survey that aimed to reflect EZ's performance exclusively last year. The argument, however, suffers from several fallacies and thus unpersuasive.

First, the author simply reckons the argument that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once as a criterion to judge which has a better performance for selecting. It is, nevertheless, partial to state only in frequency of collected waste in a week. A large number of standards may involve assessing which ultimately is better to choose for a trash collection service: EZ Disposal or ABC waste. It is common sense that a timely service is much more important than frequency of collected waste. Perhaps, ABC Waste collects trash always in a better time when most residents just finish their sweepings and hope a trash collection service can appear in time and thus provides a more satisfactory performance than EZ Disposal which has random or discretionary trash collected time. Or perhaps, employees in EZ Disposal are too irascible to tolerant so many dirty and tedious things, who is unlike the staff of ABC Waste, kindly, friendly and warm. Therefore, it is likely that even more frequent in EZ than ABC in a week to collect the trash, actually only one more time (not a substantial number) in a week, EZ does not provide a better service in collecting trash than ABC. The author does not provide other factors to weigh which have better performance in a whole ,and thus unconvincing.

Second, the author indicates that additional trucks in EZ to be ordered are sure to be employed for Walnut Grove's trash collection services. Even though the number of additional trucks in EZ is relatively large, it is probable that EZ are expanding their realms in many other areas, which has necessarily a larger quantity of trucks. If that, maybe some trucks in EZ for collecting trash in Walnut Grove town will shift from Walnut Grove to other areas to provide trash-correlating service, consequently resulting in worse trash collected service in Walnut Grove. The author does not clarify the usage of additional trucks, and therefore is unwarranted to state the suggestion of Walnut Grove's town council is mistaken. In addition, additional trucks ordered is not equal to additional trucks possessed. Nothing is constant, let alone something predicted.

Thirdly, the author concludes hastily that EZ provides exceptional service by a survey last year conducted that 80 percent of respondents agreed they were satisfied with EZ's performance. This statement the author concludes must be satisfied with third assumptions. First, the respondents are representative of all residents in Walnut Grove town. Second, the survey can truly reflects satisfaction from the respondents, not just "agree". Third, the survey last year conducted can also apply to this year and future. In addition, however, the author does not provides any evidences to justify these assumptions. In addition, to measure which is better choice for trash collection service, the author must offer a similar or the same survey for ABC, because just a survey for EZ is misled.

In sum, the argument cannot convince us that the proposal for Walnut Grove's town council to change from EZ disposal to ABC waste is mistaken. To strengthen this argument, the author must include other criteria to judge which is better choice for trash collection service, not just a little frequency of trash collected in a week and the true functions of additional trucks, if possessed, in EZ Disposal. Moreover, the author must confirm the survey's reliability and objective.

提纲：
47. Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.

1：a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures是不是真有其事?就算真有，Asia and Europe 发生的情况可以解释全球突然变冷么？
2:有没有其他原因可以解释全球温度下降，除了a huge volcanic eruption and a large meteorite colliding with Earth
3:no extant historical records of the time 是不是真的就没有呢？
4:  a loud boom mentioned 一定就是火山爆发发出的么？就算是真有火山爆发，就没有其他原因能引起the cooling么？

shalonbasUID: 2184474

[By Shalonbas]

17.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."

The arguer evaluates that the proposal for Walnut Grove's town council to change from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste is wrong, just based on the frequency of collected [collecting] trash in a week, additional trucks, and a survey that aimed to reflect [reflecting] EZ's performance exclusively last year. The argument, however, suffers from several fallacies and thus unpersuasive.

First, the author simply reckons the argument that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once as a criterion to judge which has a better performance for selecting [攻击频率和效果的关系]. It is, nevertheless, partial to state only in frequency of collected [again, collecting] waste in a [one] week. A large number of standards may involve [are involved when] assessing which ultimately is better to choose for a trash collection service: EZ Disposal or ABC waste. It is common sense that a timely service is much more important than frequency of collected waste. [这个好！赞] Perhaps, ABC Waste collects trash always in a better time when most residents just finish their sweepings and hope a trash collection service can appear in time and thus provides a more satisfactory performance than EZ Disposal which has random or discretionary trash collected time. Or perhaps, employees in EZ Disposal are too irascible to tolerant so many dirty and tedious things, who is [are] unlike the staff of ABC Waste, kindly, friendly and warm. Therefore, it is likely that even more frequent in EZ than ABC in a week to collect the trash, actually only one more time (not a substantial number) in a week, EZ does not provide a better service in collecting trash than ABC. The author does not provide other factors to weigh which have better performance in a whole, and thus unconvincing.

Second, the author indicates that additional trucks in EZ to be ordered are sure to be employed for Walnut Grove's trash collection services. Even though the number of additional trucks in EZ is relatively large, it is probable that EZ are expanding their realms in many other areas, which has necessarily a larger quantity of trucks. If that, maybe some trucks in EZ for collecting trash in Walnut Grove town will shift from Walnut Grove to other areas to provide trash-correlating service, consequently resulting in worse trash collected service in Walnut Grove. The author does not clarify the usage of additional trucks, and therefore is unwarranted to state the suggestion of Walnut Grove's town council is mistaken. In addition, additional trucks ordered is not equal to additional trucks possessed. Nothing is constant, let alone something predicted. [攻击卡车数量]

Thirdly, the author concludes hastily that EZ provides exceptional service by a survey last year conducted [showing] that 80 percent of respondents agreed they were satisfied with EZ's performance. This statement the author concludes must be satisfied with third [three] assumptions. First, the respondents are representative of all residents in Walnut Grove town. Second, the survey can truly reflects satisfaction from the respondents, not just "agree". Third, the survey [conducted] last year conducted [删] can also apply to this year and future. In addition, however, the author does not provides [provide] any evidences [evidence] to justify these assumptions. In addition, to measure which is better choice for trash collection service, the author must offer a similar or the same survey for ABC, because just a survey for EZ is misled.

In sum, the argument cannot convince us that the proposal for Walnut Grove's town council to change from EZ disposal to ABC waste is mistaken. To strengthen this argument, the author must include other criteria to judge which is better choice for trash collection service, not just a little frequency of trash collected in a week and the true functions of additional trucks, if possessed, in EZ Disposal. Moreover, the author must confirm the survey's reliability and objective.


[第一感觉，能把ARGU写得这么长真是不容易，感觉你很多攻击点都写得很深入，而且有些想法挺独特的，很赞。不过也许这中间有个平衡吧，argu不一定要向issue那样写得如此深入，也许有些地方适可而止反而效果更好，而且也不会再有需要如此长时间写作的挫败感了。

不过，关于本文的写作方法，我一直觉得不太确定，所以才拖到现在，该题版上有许多牛人争论过，你可以参考一下，地址：
1: Argument就应该这样写（二）
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... type%26typeid%3D100
2：Argument就应该这样写(二)吗
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=533374

至于语言嘛，我觉得没啥好说的了，除了些小错误之外，语言通顺，很多句子写得挺成熟的，呵呵。]