Argument17 [0710G ＋U Aug小组] 第9次作业

wm23UID: 2245087

ARGUMENT17


The author draws a conclusion that the Grove town should cooperate with EZ Disposal in trash collecting. To support his point, the author provides the evidences that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once, in addition, EZ also possesses more trucks than ABC. At the same time, the result of the survey about residents' satisfaction indicates that 80 percent of residents satisfy EZ's service. These arguments seem to prove the author's conclusion is reliable and reasonable; however, several flaws seriously weaken the argument, making the conclusion highly suspect.

Firstly, the author asserts the EZ collects the trash twice a week, which is more than ABC’s only collecting once per week. However, the author fails to provide the evidence to prove that collecting twice a week is better than once per week. To suppose, if the EZ’s staffs lack of responsibility and they do not work seriously. They may often forget to collect the trash in outlying places, or always drop the trash on the street from trash trucks. Then, the residents will be more willing that EZ reduces their time of collecting, or change another trash collecting department.

Secondly, the author should prove that more trucks equal better service. In argument, the author provides that why the town should maintain the cooperation with EZ in future is that EZ possesses more trucks than ABC. Admittedly, more trucks means a more powerful transportation ability, but one point we must understand is that the trucks cannot work by itself. The quality of staffs in EZ is the decisive condition whether the department can provide an advanced service. As abovementioned, if EZ's employees are lack of responsibility or they are lack of training and are not very skillful in the work, even the department lacks staff to work, then, we can help nothing but suspect their service quality.

Thirdly, the result of the survey is too vague to prove that the residents are really satisfied with EZ's performance. The author fails to indicate how many residents take the survey; hence, we cannot understand that whether the result of the survey can represent the whole residents, thus, the word "satisfied" will be unconvincing. On the other hand, even though we make an assumption that the EZ's service will satisfy the most residents of the town, it cannot also help us to make the decision that continuing the contrast with EZ for the service of ABC maybe is better.

In sum, this argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author has to demonstrate that the service of the EZ is really outstanding, to better evaluate the argument, the author must prove the survey result is reliable and can represent the attitude of the whole residents.

ddbearUID: 2275294

The author draws a conclusion that the Grove town should cooperate with EZ Disposal in trash collecting. To support his point, the author provides the evidences that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once, in addition, EZ also possesses more trucks than ABC. At the same time, the result of the survey about residents' satisfaction indicates that 80 percent of residents satisfy EZ's service. These arguments seem to prove the author's conclusion is reliable and reasonable; however, several flaws seriously weaken the argument, making the conclusion highly suspect.（这段还不错）

Firstly, the author asserts the EZ collects the trash twice a week, which is more than ABC’s only collecting（去了更顺些） once per week. However, the author fails to provide the evidence to prove that collecting twice a week is better than once per week. To suppose, if the EZ’s staffs lack of responsibility and they do not work seriously（和上篇很像的问题，if引导的话，一定得还有一个句子做主句。其实你已经to suppose了，不用if就可以了。或者把句号改逗号让后句做主句。）. They may often forget to collect the trash in outlying places, or always drop the trash on the street from trash trucks. Then, the residents will be more willing that EZ reduces their time of collecting, or change another trash collecting department.（记得每段结束总结一下~）（感觉这个反例举得不够合适……呵呵，有点牵强）

Secondly, the author should prove that more trucks equal better service. In （the） argument, the author provides（用claims顺点吧） that why the town should maintain the cooperation with EZ in future is that EZ possesses more trucks than ABC. Admittedly, more trucks means a more powerful transportation ability, but one point we must understand is that the trucks cannot work by itself. The quality of staffs in EZ is the decisive condition whether the department can provide an advanced service. As abovementioned, if EZ's employees are lack of responsibility or they are lack of training and are not very skillful in the work, even the department lacks staff to work,（这一连串的并列，最好再斟酌一下~否定句好像不用and） then, we can help nothing but suspect their service quality.

Thirdly, the result of the survey is too vague to prove that the residents are really satisfied with EZ's performance. The author fails to indicate how many residents take the survey; hence, we cannot understand that whether the result of the survey can represent the whole residents,（句号） thus, the word "satisfied" will be unconvincing. On the other hand, even though we make an assumption that the EZ's service will satisfy the most residents of the town, it cannot also help us to make the decision that continuing the contrast with EZ for the service of ABC（ABC不是镇的名字，是另一个垃圾公司。） maybe is（2个be了） better.

In sum, this argument is unconvincing as it stands（呵呵，自己再看看，错哪儿了~）. To strengthen the argument, the author has to demonstrate that the service of the EZ is really outstanding,（句号） to better evaluate the argument, the author must prove the survey result is reliable and can represent the attitude of the whole residents.