Argument17 CLVolkov 4月作文小组第14次作业

CLVolkovUID：2305902

TOPIC: ARGUMENT17 - 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."
WORDS: 351          TIME: 0:27:07          DATE: 2007-4-7

The letter claimed that Walnut Grove town should continue using EZ instead of switching to ABC for trash collecting, based on the different frequency of trash collection, the additional order of trucks and last year's town survey with EZ's performance. However, none of these seems convincing.

Firstly, the letter has provided no information of detailed collecting process beyond the frequency between EZ and ABC. Though EZ collects trash twice a week, it may just divide the town in two parts and hence once a part of it. That would be equivalent to ABC's once collection on the whole town. Besides, ABC hasn't served Walnut Grove before. Maybe it would adjust and improve its collecting process after a while of serving and have better performance than EZ.

Secondly, we learned that EZ has ordered additional trucks. But is it true that EZ would use these trucks for Walnut Grove? As EZ may serve towns other than Walnut Grove, it might have made the order for other towns. Even it's going to invest more trucks, nobody would deduce a better performance since it is not judged merely by the number of trucks. The anticipatory quality of performance couldn't be concluded with the provided information.

Thirdly, only a percentage of respondents of last year's survey is given in the letter without other necessary elements of a survey, such as sample size, sampling methodologies, etc. Without these information included it would not be appropriate to see the whole town's judgement on EZ's performance. Besides, the responce of "Satisfied" may be too general for an answer since the problems could be very misleading. Even if 80 percent of the town were satisfied with EZ's performance, there is no comparisons with ABC's performance. Maybe ABC would do better with less amount of money. Thus the survey may be misleading.

In all, it's agreed that EZ may increase the monthly fee for some reason and it may carry out improvements to serve Walnut Grove. However, it wouldn't be appropriate to make a judgement just with the presented evidences. The letter should be more detailed to argue its point.

寂寞樱花UID：2306511

The letter claimed that Walnut Grove town should continue using EZ instead of switching to ABC for trash collecting, based on the different frequency of trash collection, the additional order of trucks and last year's town survey with EZ's performance. However, none of these seems convincing.

Firstly, the letter has provided no information of detailed collecting process beyond the frequency between EZ and ABC. Though EZ collects trash twice a week, it may just divide the town in two parts and hence once a part of it. That would be equivalent to ABC's once collection on the whole town. Besides, ABC hasn't served Walnut Grove before. Maybe it would adjust and improve its collecting process after a while of serving and have better performance than EZ.

Secondly, we learned that EZ has ordered additional trucks. But is it true that EZ would use these trucks for Walnut Grove? (TS可以写的更明确一点)As EZ may serve towns other than Walnut Grove, it might have made the order for other towns. Even it's going to invest more trucks, nobody would deduce a better performance since it is not judged merely by the number of trucks. The anticipatory quality of performance couldn't be concluded with the provided information.

Thirdly, only a percentage of respondents of last year's survey is given in the letter without other necessary elements of a survey, such as sample size, sampling methodologies, etc. Without these information included it would not be appropriate to see the whole town's judgement on EZ's performance. Besides, the responce of "Satisfied" may be too general for an answer since the problems could be very misleading.(呵呵，我又觉得看起来不爽了) Even if 80 percent of the town were satisfied with EZ's performance, there is no comparisons(不用s吧) with ABC's performance. Maybe ABC would do better with less amount of money. Thus the survey may be misleading. (可以再加一句总结)

In all, it's agreed that EZ may increase the monthly fee for some reason and it may carry out improvements to serve Walnut Grove. However, it wouldn't be appropriate to make a judgement just with the presented evidences. The letter should be more detailed to argue its point.

3个论据一个一段的攻击,没有太大的问题,段内的逻辑不错,如果段与段之间再加强一下逻辑回更好~