Argument117 第9篇 很久没贴A了，来一篇刚出炉的

amanda1011UID：2106668

越写越觉得不咋地，也不知道毛病在哪！XDJM给评评

------摘要------
作者：amanda1011     共用时间：25分1秒     422 words (revised 459words)
从2005年7月5日0时4分到2005年7月5日0时25分

------题目------
The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.
'Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores.'

------正文------
The conclusion that we will increase stock of office supplies and office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores with those changes seems to be sound and convincing. To substantiate it, the arguer quotes a survey to show us that a lot of people are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. However, a further analysis would reveal that the argument suffers from several flaws.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that the demand of the office-supply would be increased. He does not provide any evidence to convince us of that the customers need more and more office supplies. In that case, if we increase stock of them, we would be worried about who would buy our commercials.

Secondly, the survey in the argument has so many suspicious points that we would cast doubt on its result. For example, we have no idea about the people take apart in the survey. How old are they? How many men or women in it? What are they working for? Did the survey carried in a small scale? Since the arguer fails to provide enough information about the samples in the survey, we would be doubtful for its availability. Moreover, we could not rule out the possibility that there are a lot of people who do not work at home would be uninterested in the survey and did not send back their respondent.

Thirdly, granted that there are more and more people who have to work at home, it does not follow that they need more home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders or fax machines. It is possible that they need only the laptops or desktop computers to finish their work and leave other work done in their companies. In this case, the need of those machines would not be increased markedly.

The last but not the least, the arguer considers that the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of the stores without strong reasoning. Even if people would purchase more office stuffs, it is very likely that they would choose the productions in other stores because they do not like to shop in the Valu-Mart. Also, it is equally possible that other departments would also make their effort to increase their profit. We could not jump to the conclusion that the office-supply departments would be the most profitable based on the mere fact provided by the arguer.

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Unless the arguer provides more detailed information about the samples of the survey or more reliable evidence that people would buy more office supplies in Valu-Mart, we could not accept his/her conclusion.

udoUID：2114276

The conclusion that we will increase stock of office supplies and office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores with those changes seems to be sound and convincing. To substantiate it, the arguer quotes a survey to show us that a lot of people are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. However, a further analysis would reveal that the argument suffers from several flaws.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that the demand of the office-supply would be increased. He does not provide any evidence to convince us of that the customers need more and more office supplies. In that case, if we increase stock of them, we would be worried about who would buy our commercials. 这段多说写吧。taking more work home 与buy home office machines, it depends on the practical need of the work... maybe just read some report or make an excel table on computer which do not require any device at all.

Secondly, the survey in the argument has so many suspicious points that we would cast doubt on its result. For example, we have no idea about the people take apart in the survey. How old are they? How many men or women in it? What are they working for? Did the survey carried in a small scale? Since the arguer fails to provide enough information about the samples in the survey, we would be doubtful for its availability. Moreover, we could not rule out the possibility that there are a lot of people who do not work at home would be uninterested in the survey and did not send back their respondent.

Thirdly, granted that there are more and more people who have to work at home, it does not follow that they need more home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders or fax machines. It is possible that they need only the laptops or desktop computers to finish their work and leave other work done in their companies. In this case, the need of those machines would not be increased markedly. 这段应该和上上段合并啊，因为说的是一个意思

The last but not the least, the arguer considers that the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of the stores without strong reasoning. Even if people would purchase more office stuffs, it is very likely that they would choose the productions in other stores because they do not like to shop in the Valu-Mart. Also, it is equally possible that other departments would also make their effort to increase their profit. We could not jump to the conclusion that the office-supply departments would be the most profitable based on the mere fact provided by the arguer. 还可以说说经典的profit问题， stores cause costs, while revenue is uncertain...

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Unless the arguer provides more detailed information about the samples of the survey or more reliable evidence that people would buy more office supplies in Valu-Mart, we could not accept his/her conclusion.

udoUID：2114276

我也写了一篇are117
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=312890