argument17 (no pain no gain) 欢迎拍砖~

tingting_tUID: 2124800

17The 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."

Outline:
1 并不能仅凭EZ每周收两次垃圾而ABC只收一次就判定ABC不好
2 EZ新订购的卡车并不一定会用于为Walnut Grove town服务
3 对EZ公司的调查问卷并不一定客观真实

正文：
This letter recommends that Walnut Grove's town council shouldn’t change the trash collection services from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste just because EZ has raised its monthly fee. To support this recommendation the author points out that EZ collects trash twice per week while ABC collects only one. He also notes that EZ has recently ordered additional trucks. Finally, the author of the letter cites a survey in which 80% of the respondents were satisfied with the service of EZ. This letter is flawed in several critical respects.

TO begin with, merely depend on the frequency of collecting garbage doesn’t equal to the service provided by the company. We haven’t got enough information of ABC’s service, so it is arbitrary to make the conclusion that ABC’s service is inferior to EZ’s. In addition there is no evidence whether one time each week is enough to collect the trash. If ABC has the ability to do this, why should the residents of the town stick to the previous contract with EZ? As the feel of ABC is 25% cheaper than that of EZ’s.

Moreover, the author fails to consider that the additional trucks ordered by EZ would probably serve other towns, and no evidence shows its current 20 trucks are all used for the Walnut Grove town. But we may infer that ABC’s all 20 fleet are used for the Walnut Grove town as well. Furthermore, we don’t know whether EZ really need extra trucks. Maybe that is the reason why it raises its service fee. If that is true, why not the residents turn to the ABC Waste for a lower fee?

A third problem with this letter is with the survey the author cites. According to the survey, 80% percent people are content with the service of EZ. However, the author fails to give us sufficient supports that the respondents of this survey are really representative of the whole population. Additionally, by no contrast shouldn’t the author declare whether the people will be satisfied with ABC’s service.

In conclusion, the recommendation is not well supported. To strengthen it the author must show that the EZ Disposal is superior to ABC Waste in every respect and the use of additional trucks will surely improve its service in Walnut Grove. In order to better evaluate the argument, we would need to know whether the survey is subjective and representative enough to convince us. We should also need more information about ABC Waste to help us make the right conclusion.

lorraineyeUID: 2157370

Tingting, 这篇文是不是限时独立完成的？不错哈，论证严谨，反驳有力，主要逻辑错误也抓出来了，赞！ 中间有的句子的表达注意一下就好了，努力把意思最明确最清晰地表达出来。总得来说不错，继续加油哈~~

This letter recommends that Walnut Grove's town council shouldn’t change the trash collection services from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste [表达有点问题，change的是公司] just because EZ has raised its monthly fee. To support this recommendation the author points out that EZ collects trash twice per week while ABC collects only one[once]. He also notes that EZ has recently ordered additional trucks. Finally, the author of the letter cites a survey in which 80% of the respondents were satisfied with the service of EZ. This letter is flawed in several critical respects.

TO begin with, merely depend on the frequency of collecting garbage doesn’t equal to the service provided by the company [merely depend on应该去掉吧？后面是个完整的句子]. We haven’t got enough information of ABC’s service, so it is arbitrary to make the conclusion that ABC’s service is inferior to[用得好！] EZ’s. In addition there is no evidence [about]whether one time each week [once per week] is enough to collect the trash. If ABC has the ability to do this, why should the residents of the town stick to the previous contract with EZ? As [这里要表达的是什么意思？更别提？是该用as吗] the feel[fee] of ABC is 25% cheaper than that of EZ’s [than EZ’s].

Moreover, the author fails to consider that the additional trucks ordered by EZ would probably serve other towns, and no evidence shows its current 20 trucks are all used for the Walnut Grove town. But we may infer that ABC’s all 20 fleet [?] are used for the Walnut Grove town as well [as well 在这是什么意思]. Furthermore, we don’t know whether EZ really need extra trucks. Maybe that is the reason why it raises its service fee[这一点没有说明白]. If that is true, why not [don’t] the residents turn to [换switch是不是好点] the ABC Waste for a lower fee?

A third problem with this letter is with the survey the author cites[建议在TS里把survey的问题指出来，至少要说以下它unpersuasive啥的]. According to the survey, 80% percent people are content with the service of EZ. However, the author fails to give us sufficient supports that the respondents of this survey are really representative of[for] the whole population [residents of WG]. Additionally, by no contrast shouldn’t the author [这个表达有点怪，顺着说吧，the auther should not declare that ……without comparison]declare whether the people will be satisfied with ABC’s service [这句表意不大清晰].

In conclusion, the recommendation is not well supported. To strengthen it the author must show that the EZ Disposal is superior to ABC Waste in every respect and the use of additional trucks will surely improve its service in Walnut Grove. In order to better evaluate the argument [这句和前面strengthen it意思重复了], we would need to know whether the survey is subjective and representative enough to convince us. We should also need more information about ABC Waste to help us make the right conclusion.

tingting_tUID: 2124800

可以说百分之九十是原创吧~ 呵呵~
限时还做不到，不过用了一个多小时也算是最短的了
谢谢修改和鼓励啦~