argument17 [kb9.11] 第3次作业

goldzincUID: 2378390

题目：ARGUMENT17 - 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."

字数：459          用时：00:44:28          日期：2007-8-17 下午 03:12:46

In this argument, the arguer opposed the decision of switching the trash collection company from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste made by the town council, because the arguer thinks that EZ will provide a better service. However, the evidence mentioned above insufficiently lends support to the arguer's counterview. The arguer should take the following points into account and reevaluate his or her position again.

First of all, though EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once, as the arguer stated above, it doesn't mean that there is a need for the company to do so. In fact, it's entirely possible that the residents in the town produce only a little garbage every week so that once collection a week is enough. More collection often means more cost of the companies, and maybe that is why EZ raised the price recently. The residents shouldn't pay money for what they do not need. Thus, unless there is indeed a real need for twice collection a week, EZ does not have an advantage at this point.

The arguer further argued that EZ has ordered additional trucks so will have more truck in near future compared with ABC. But we cannot judge a company just depends on how many trucks it has. There are many factor affecting the quality of the its service besides the truck numbers, like the management, the professional skill of the worker, and so forth. Moreover, even if we admit that an increase in truck numbers will lead to a relatively better service, but there is no evidence shows that these trucks will be put into use in the town of WG. Therefore, neither can this fact prove that EZ' service is better ABC's.

Finally, the arguer cited in the argument a survey which shows 80% of respondents are satisfied with EZ's performance. Even though we believe this survey is representative and trustful --which is in fact open to doubt, chances are that ABC can provide a service that makes even more people satisfied. Without a more comprehensive survey which proves not only the residents' satisfaction of EZ's service but also the dissatisfaction of ABC's, it is not reasonable to say EZ is more favorable among the inhabitants of the town.

In sum, none of the evidence in the above arguments can directly prove that EZ is really better than ABC. To further justify this argument, the arguer need to collect more evidence directly indicating that ABC cannot provide a service as good as EZ's, what's more, considering a recent raise of price of EZ's service that makes it more expensive than ABC’s, the arguer must prove that it worth that price.

这次字数时间都还可以哦～可能这篇比较简单吧

[ 本帖最后由 goldzinc 于 2007-8-17 19:59 编辑 ]

phoenixlwUID: 2382912

题目：ARGUMENT17 - 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."

字数：459          用时：00:44:28          日期：2007-8-17 下午 03:12:46

In this argument, the arguer opposed the decision of switching the trash collection company from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste made by the town council, because the arguer thinks(注意时态一致) that EZ will provide a better service. However, the evidence mentioned above insufficiently lends support to the arguer's counterview. The arguer should take the following points into account and reevaluate his or her position again.(重复)

First of all, though EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once, as the arguer stated above, it doesn't(不要用缩写啊...上篇修改你的提过这个问题) mean that there is a need for the company to do so. In fact, it's entirely possible that the residents in the town produce only a little garbage every week so that once collection a week is enough. More collection often means more cost of the companies, and maybe that is why EZ raised the price recently(分析到位啊~~). The residents shouldn't pay money for what they do not need. Thus, unless there is indeed a real need for twice collection a week, EZ does not have an advantage at this point.

The arguer further argued that EZ has ordered additional trucks so it will have more trucks in near future compared with ABC. But we cannot judge a company just depends on how many trucks it has. There are many factors affecting the quality of the its service besides the truck numbers, like the management, the professional skill of the worker, and so forth. Moreover, even if we admit that an increase in truck numbers will lead to a relatively better service, but there is no evidence shows that these trucks will be put into use in the town of WG. Therefore, neither can this fact prove that EZ' service is better ABC's.

Finally, the arguer cited in the argument a survey which shows 80% of respondents are satisfied with EZ's performance(建议每段首句就直接提出观点). Even though we believe this survey is representative and trustful --which is in fact open to doubt, chances(什么意思啊) are that ABC can provide a service that makes even more people satisfied. Without a more comprehensive survey which proves not only the residents' satisfaction of EZ's service but also the dissatisfaction of ABC's(感觉从这个角度论证representation不大合适), it is not reasonable to say EZ is more favorable among the inhabitants of the town.

In sum, none of the evidence in the above arguments can directly prove that EZ is really better than ABC. To further justify this argument, the arguer need to collect more evidence directly indicating that ABC cannot provide a service as good(具体点) as EZ's, what's more, considering a recent raise of price of EZ's service that makes it more expensive than ABC’s, the arguer must prove that it worth that price.


revised by No.11 Phoenixlw