argument17 (米国有米）bailamo27第一次作业３

bailamo27UID: 2191717

argument17(2006-11-15)
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."
(Walnut Grove的市委提议选择ABC Waste，而不是EZ Disposal（它是过去十年中和Walnut Grove签约提供垃圾收集服务的机构），因为EZ最近把他们每月的收费从$2000提高到了$2500，而ABC仍然是$2000。但市委是错误的，我们应该继续使用EZ。EZ每周收集两次垃圾，而ABC只收集一次。而且，EZ当前的卡车拥有量和ABC一样都是20辆，但它已定购了更多的车辆。最后，EZ还提供优越的服务：去年市镇调查中80％的回应者同意他们对于EZ的表现是"满意"的。)
Full text: (529 words)
In this letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper,  the write states several reasons that the town council shouldn't switch from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste: (1) EZ Disposal has had the long contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove. (2) EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. (3) EZ has more trucks than ABC and it provides exceptional service. (4) most residents in town satisfied with EZ's services. To scrutinize closely, none of them can provide persuasive evidents that the town councile's advocation is mistaken.

Firstly, EZ has a fixed bussiness connection with Walnut Grove, residents in the town may very close to the services that EZ provide. But there's no statement of ABC Waste that it cann't provide the same, even better services than EZ. People live in Walnut may not familiar to ABC Waste. Maybe ABC Waste hasn't put great strengh in advertisement. So the writer should get some information about ABC Waste. It's unfaire to refuse to contract with ABC Waste without enough investigation support that ABC cann't provide a better services. And recently, EZ raised its monthly fee from $2000 to $2500 while ABC still keeps its fee. There's no evidence show that EZ has the proper reasons to raise its fee, such as, better services, improved technical equipments and so on. So there's no reason for people in the town to try a cheaper company.

Secondly, in the letter that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. But is it necessary that for EZ to collects trash twice a week? Maybe once collection per week is enough for this area. If so, a higher fee is not equal to the services that EZ provides. In the letter, the writer states that EZ has ordered additioanl trucks. But no information shows that these trucks may use in the Walnut Grove town, or use for trash collection. These trucks maybe used in other towns or other use. The writer didn't give us any information about it. So there's no direct relation between the new trucks and services that EZ provides and the increased fee.
Finally, a town survey of last year has showed 80% people in town were statisfied with the services that EZ provides. But it seems this survey is not representative (typical). Maybe these people is ones who statisfied with EZ, or the investigation is send back by those like EZ. But no information shows that people who recieved this survey would like to use EZ continuously while the fee has increased.

To summarize, the writer has made a harsh dicision to keep make contract with EZ Disposal. To persuade the town council to keep contract with EZ, the writer should make a deeper investigation and a better comparision about the two companies.   I'd also need to know why EZ Disposal raised its monthly fee and the services that can provide in future. Meanwhile, the write should make a new survey in town, choose different people to assess the performance of the two companies. After hearing the opinions of the residents and the government, the writer may have a final dicision.

谢谢大家多多指教！不好的地方，烂的地方大家只管说！！！

aefiterUID: 2134740

有时间好好看看

aefiterUID: 2134740

In this letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper,  thewrite states several reasons that the town council shouldn't switchfrom EZ Disposal to ABC Waste: (1) EZ Disposal has had the longcontract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove. (2) EZ collectstrash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. (3) EZ has moretrucks than ABC and it provides exceptional service. (4) most residentsin town satisfied with EZ's services. To scrutinize closely, none ofthem can provide persuasive evidents that the town councile'sadvocation is mistaken.

Firstly, EZ has a fixed bussiness connection with Walnut Grove,residents in the town may veryclose to the services that EZ provide. But there's no statement of ABC Waste that it cann't provide the same,even better services than EZ.[为什么作者要替论者作主观的预测，即便ABC能better serve the town, 论者依然可以驳斥选择ABC，因此这句话作者显然不应该说] People live in Walnut may not familiar toABC Waste. Maybe ABC Waste hasn't put great strengh in advertisement.So the writer should get some information about ABC Waste.It's unfaireto refuse to contract with ABC Waste without enough investigationsupport that ABC cann't provide a better services. And recently, EZraised its monthly fee from $2000 to $2500 while ABC still keeps itsfee. There's no evidence show that EZ has the proper reasons to raiseits fee, such as, better services, improved technical equipments and soon. So there's no reason for people in the town to try a cheapercompany. [最后一句好像意思反了][文章的重点时指出材料中的漏洞，而不是自己去设想材料应该是什么样，论证有偏离。]
[作者没有明确说ABC不能提供很好的服务，我们需要作ABC的假设么？]
[作者想指出的第一个逻辑错误我明白了，但这好像并不是论者用来支持自己的论据。即使要写，重心是不是应该放在10年的合同不能说明现在的服务质量]
[是不是应该写：即使EZ完全有理由继续为town服务，论者也应指出，为什么要放弃选择ABC。]

Secondly, in the letter that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABCcollects only once. But is it necessary that for EZ to collects trashtwice a week? Maybe once collection per week is enough for this area.If so, a higher fee is not equal to the services that EZ provides. Inthe letter, the writer states that EZ has ordered additioanl trucks.But no information shows that these trucks may use in the Walnut Grovetown, or use for trash collection. These trucks maybe used in othertowns or other use. The writer didn't give us any information about it.So there's no direct relation between the new trucks and services thatEZ provides and the increased fee.
Finally, a town survey of last year has showed 80% people in town werestatisfied with the services that EZ provides. But it seems this surveyis not representative (typical). Maybe these people is ones whostatisfied with EZ, or the investigation is send back by those like EZ.But no information shows that people who recieved this survey wouldlike to use EZ continuously while the fee has increased. [这一段写了三个flaw，最好分成三段，然后展开]

To summarize, the writer has made a harsh dicision[不错，学习] to keep makecontract with EZ Disposal. To persuade the town council to keepcontract with EZ, the writer should make a deeper investigation and abetter comparision about the two companies.   I'd also need to know whyEZ Disposal raised its monthly fee and the services that can provide infuture. Meanwhile, the write should make a new survey in town, choosedifferent people to assess the performance of the two companies. Afterhearing the opinions of the residents and the government, the writermay have a final dicision.


[拼写错误很多，而且第一段感觉跟传统的argument不太像，是不是lz特意这样安排的？这种论证方式，再探讨]

bailamo27UID: 2191717

对于第一段的开头，我是参考了网络资源里的北美范文的开头，当然，我写得有点赶时间，没有仔细琢磨，看来不能草率行事，还是要慢慢静下心来写东西．静心！！！