Argument137 【challenge yourself】第四次作业by linyunf

linyunfUID: 2405027

1其他原因导致居民不去river
2agency的效率不能保证
3增加预算缺少信息
The editorial concludes that the Mason City council will need to improve its publicly owned lands along the Mason River because the agency responsible for the river plans to clean it and more residents there will use the river as places for recreation. However, I find the suggestion is groundless and the argument is problematic in several critical respects.

To begin with, the argument depends on the hasty assumptions that as long as the river is cleaned again the recreation use of the river will surely increase. To support the assumption, the arguer cites the complains of the quality of the river and rare usage of the river as places for swimming, boating, and fishing, all of which are the favorite form of recreation of the local people. But the argument may overlook other factors that lead to the situations. For example, there are no sufficient facilities for entertainment. Or maybe people there do not go there just because the others do not. Without accounting for other causes that result in the unpopularity of the entertainment feature of the river, the suggestion was unwarranted.

Another groundless assumption is that the agency of the river will definitely fulfill the accomplishment of cleaning up the river. No evidence is there to sustain the assumption. Maybe the agency lacks of efficiencies or enough funds to purify the river. If the author cannot provide such evidences, the suggestion for increase its budget on the lands along the river is unjustified.

What’s more, the argument is lack of information about why the lands along the river need more budget as a result of the rise of recreation events of the river. Maybe the increasing activities may lead to other consumption there thus more budget will bring out more chances for the council to make money or create more jobs for other residents. Absence of such reasons makes the suggestion ungrounded.
To sum up, the argument rests on two unjustified assumptions and lacks of enough information that the suggestion requires. To improve the editorial, the arguer has to provide the reasons that really cause the rare usage of the river and the evidences about the agency’s efficiencies. More reasons which result in the suggestion are also essential to the better understanding of the editorial.

sabrinabaobaoUID: 2515866

The editorial concludes that the Mason City council will need to improve its publicly owned lands along the Mason River because the agency responsible for the river plans to clean it and more residents there will use the river as places for recreation. However, I find the suggestion is groundless and the argument is problematic in several critical respects.

To begin with, the argument depends on the hasty assumptions that as long as the river is cleaned again the recreation use of the river will surely increase. To support the assumption, the arguer cites the complains of the quality of the river and rare usage of the river as places for swimming, boating, and fishing, all of which are the favorite form of recreation of the local people. But the argument may overlook other factors that lead to the situations. For example, there are no sufficient facilities for entertainment. Or maybe people there do not go there just because the others do not. Without accounting for other causes that result in the unpopularity of the entertainment feature of the river, the suggestion was unwarranted.（我觉得可以攻击调查的模糊性更有说服力）

Another groundless assumption is that the agency of the river will definitely fulfill the accomplishment of cleaning up the river. No evidence is there to sustain the assumption. Maybe the agency lacks of efficiencies or enough funds to purify the river. If the author cannot provide such evidences, the suggestion for increase its budget on the lands along the river is unjustified.

What’s （ets 规定了不能用缩写）more, the argument is lack of information about why the lands along the river need more budget as a result of the rise of recreation events of the river. Maybe the increasing activities may lead to other consumption there thus more budget will bring out more chances for the council to make money or create more jobs for other residents. Absence of such reasons makes the suggestion ungrounded.（这一段展开不充分）

To sum up, the argument rests on two unjustified assumptions and lack of enough information that the suggestion requires. To improve the editorial, the arguer has to provide the reasons that really cause the rare usage of the river and the evidences about the agency’s efficiencies. More reasons which result in the suggestion are also essential to the better understanding of the editorial.
逻辑很好，就是展开稍弱，所以字数就比较少了；呵呵