argument241 【kelaidoscpoe】小组第九次作业

cloverlanpusUID: 2606441

In this argument, the arguer concludes that XYZ company should use Delany Personnel Firm rather than Walsh Personnel Firm. To support his conclusion, the arguer cites the performance of Walsh eight years ago and the achievement of these two companies last year. However, the argument still suffers with several fallacies for the arguer's false comparison.

To begin with, the arguer fails to convince me that the Walsh company is not satisfactory enough. Although the arguer cites that Walsh only helped half of the laid-off workers to find jobs eight years ago, this fact lends no support to his conclusion for two reason. The first one, the arguer unfairly use the performance of Walsh eight years ago to represent its later one, without considering that the service of Walsh may have already been improved in this eight years and now it achieves a high level. Secondly, the arguer doesn't provide any details of the laid-off workers eight years ago. I am not told the total number of the laid-off workers eight years ago. Maybe XYZ dismissal so many workers that year that even half of them is still a huge number and this, on the contrary, proves Walsh's effective service.

What's more, the assertion that the effect of Delany is better than that of Walsh is also suspicious. To support his assertion,the arguer provide two evidences which are both questionable. The first one, bigger staff and larger number of branches are not sufficient to evidence its higher effect due to the absence of the purpose of these redundant workers and branches. It is entirely possible that these staff and branches are used for other personnel affairs which are not concerned with assistance in writing resumes and developing interviewing skills. The second one, without any clear explanation, the average time of finding jobs last year can hardly advocate the arguer's conclusion. I find no sign in the argument that the desire and working skills of the these two companies' customers are the same. The arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the laid-off workers who get help from the Delany truly desired to find a job immediately and are well-trained, just like those in XYZ last year, while the customers in Walsh were not. Unless taking all factors affecting the results into consideration,the arguer's conclusion will still be far from credible.

At last, even if Delany were indeed better than Walsh, the recommend of changing personnel company can also be beneficial for XYZ. As mentioned in the argument, the cost of Delany is higher than that of Walsh, whether Delany's service deserves that cost is open to doubt, let alone the suspicion that XYZ can afford it. In addition, there is no sign that the service of Walsh is not sufficient for the laid-off workers and may lead to complaints. Thus, more information about the necessity of Delany's service at a higher cost is indispensable.

Overall the arguer doesn't lend a directive and effective support to his argument. To strengthen his argument, the arguer need to offer more information about the service of these two personnel companies and and the necessity of using Delany.   

atticuswangUID: 2663189

In this argument, the arguer concludes that XYZ company should use Delany Personnel Firm rather than Walsh Personnel Firm. To support his conclusion, the arguer cites the performance of Walsh eight years ago and the achievement of these two companies last year. However, the argument still suffers with several fallacies for the arguer's false comparison.（开头很简洁好）
To begin with, the arguer fails to convince me that the Walsh company is not satisfactory enough. Although the arguer cites that Walsh only helped half of the laid-off workers to find jobs eight years ago, this fact lends no support to his conclusion for two reasons. The first one, the arguer unfairly use the performance of Walsh eight years ago to represent its later one, without considering that the service of Walsh may have already been improved in this eight years and now it achieves a high level. Secondly, the arguer doesn't provide any details of the laid-off workers eight years ago. I am not told the total number of the laid-off workers eight years ago. Maybe XYZ dismissal so many workers that year that even half of them is still a huge number and this, on the contrary, proves Walsh's effective service.
What's more, the assertion that the effect of Delany is better than that of Walsh is also suspicious. To support his assertion, the arguer provides two evidences which are both questionable. The first one, bigger staff and larger number of branches are not sufficient to evidence its higher effect due to the absence of the purpose of these redundant workers and branches. It is entirely possible that these staff and branches are used for other personnel affairs which are not concerned with assistance in writing resumes and developing interviewing skills. The second one, without any clear explanation, the average time of finding jobs last year can hardly advocate the arguer's conclusion. I find no sign in the argument that the desire and working skills of the these two companies' customers are the same. The arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the laid-off workers who get help from the Delany truly desired to find a job immediately and are well-trained, just like those in XYZ last year, while the customers in Walsh were not. Unless taking all factors affecting the results into consideration, the arguer's conclusion will still be far from credible.
At last, even if Delany were indeed better than Walsh, the recommend of changing personnel company can also be beneficial for XYZ.(这一句没写完) As mentioned in the argument, the cost of Delany is higher than that of Walsh, whether Delany's service deserves that cost is open to doubt, let alone the suspicion that XYZ can afford it. In addition, there is no sign that the service of Walsh is not sufficient for the laid-off workers and may lead to complaints. Thus, more information about the necessity of Delany's service at a higher cost is indispensable.
Overall the arguer doesn't lend a directive and effective support to his argument. To strengthen his argument, the arguer need to offer more information about the service of these two personnel companies and and the necessity of using Delany.   

楼主的A论证很丰满，结构也很清晰，改天抽空跟你交流一下哈～～