Argument76 同主题写作，不拍也来看看吧！

翦瞳UID: 184872

第一次限时，376字，拼写错误不多，（用的词简单），但是总字数太少.简单修改了一下415字，括号里是后来加的。
-----题目------
The following appeared as part of an article in a health and beauty magazine.
'A group of volunteers participated in a study of consumer responses to the new Luxess face cream. Every morning for a month, they washed their faces with mild soap and then applied Luxess. At the end of that month, most volunteers reported a marked improvement in the way their skin looked and felt. Thus it appears that Luxess is truly effective in improving the condition of facial skin.'
------正文------
At first glance, the arguer presents a sound conclusion that Luxess is truly effective in improving the condition of facial skin. However, a complete analysis impels us to draw some other explanations of the given evidences on which the statement bases.

At first, the author fails to give any information of the volunteers such as the district they live, the age structure they belong to, and as like. I can not see any evidence to illustrate that the experiment was conducted in a random way. What is worse is that there is not any reference of the volunteers' number participated and whether the group is enough or not to make a senseful analysis. If the study is unwarranted, how can we make a significant answer from it?

Secondly, a month may be too short a time to decide the real effect of Luxess face cream. In common sense, we should need a long-term evaluation of a making-up product before we can safely claim it is helpful. In addition, the author fails to exclude possible effects of soft soap which may play an important role in the improvement. As we know, soft soap does help to clean faces in consequence with improving skin.（ If we mistake the soft soap’s effect for Luxess face cream’s effect, the following result would be rootless）.

Thirdly, the reports of the volunteers in the end are too obscure and vague to draw any conclusion. We can hardly infer the standard or criteria to determine the marked level is distinctive and precise. Perhaps a hundred peoples have a hundred standards which result in the conclusion could not maintain persuasive. （We should carry out an uniform standard to clarify the true results. ）

Last not least, we can not deny the possibility that the volunteers may incline to report a positive result to the company. Maybe, the product is offered for free so its users owe to the company spiritally and tend to overestimate Luxess face cream. There is another possibility that the reported effect is the influence of mood illusion other than the authentic and subjective result. These possibilities can eventually undermine the author's statement.

In sum, as the above discussions, the arguement has so many patent flaws that it needs more information to support the statement. First of all, the arguer should rule out the possible effect of the soft soap. Moreover, he needs to provide more detailed conditions about the volunteers and to make （enact） a precise criterion of the marked improvement.

aimei2005UID: 2119194

看完感觉挺不错,实在比我要好多多,我的词汇量非常少,有的词的用法我还不明白.我只会给个总体印象,具体的好在哪里,就是结构挺清楚,语言也不错.再细的话,我没法说的很透.

翦瞳UID: 184872

呵呵，听见有人赞，心里实在美得很，但若有人批评，估计心里会更踏实。
呵呵，一起努力！

fengboallanUID: 157405

你的名字吸引我进来了
呵呵
只说问题：
1 开头太长，简单些，或者不要，我打算根本就不写了。
2说明谬误之后，你需要qualify it
也就是说，如果要的出什么样的结论，我们需要怎么怎么样，才能使这一步真是可信
呵呵
这样你的东西就丰满了
过渡的时候可以用上一个谬误过渡到下一个谬误

翦瞳UID: 184872

楼上的帅哥谢谢啦，文章被你这样的GG看一看，嘿嘿......
(狂笑中ing)
我说字数上不去呢，qualify it! 懂了！

翦瞳UID: 184872

字数上去了，但是考场没有时间这样改啊 546字

At first glance, the arguer presents a sound conclusion that Luxess is truly effective in improving the condition of facial skin. However, a complete analysis impels us to draw some other explanations of the given evidences on which the statement bases.

To begin with, the author fails to give any information of the volunteers such as the district they live in, the age structure they belong to, and gender proportion of them. In common sense, all the factors might influence the result. For example, face condition of men is different from that of women, the old are different with the young in face condition as well, and living condition could also impact on the result. Furthermore, I can not see any evidence to illustrate that the experiment was conducted with the random sampling principle which is essential to a scientific and persuasive research. What is worse is that there is not any reference of the volunteers' number participated in this survey, so we have good reason to suspect whether the group is enough, in order to make a senseful analysis. If the study is unwarranted, how can we make a significant answer from it?

In addition, we can not deny the possibility that the volunteers may incline to report a positive result to the company before we understand the relationship between volunteers and company. Maybe, the product is offered for free so its users feel that they appreciate the company or the volunteers are the own employees of this company. All the possibilities tend to an overestimated value of Luxess face cream. Even if volunteers are neutral and impartial about the result, it cannot convince us because the reports of the volunteers in the end are too obscure and vague to draw any conclusion. We can hardly carry out a standard or criteria to determine the marked level which should be distinctive and precise. We must acknowledge that perhaps a hundred peoples have a hundred standards which result in the conclusion could not maintain persuasive. Before an uniform standard are clarified, we have to doubt about the result

Last but not least, even if the survey is valid, the real cause result in the improvement is uncertain because the author fails to exclude possible effects of soft soap which may play an important role in the improvement. According to scientific common sense, soft soap does help to clean faces alone in consequence with improving skin condition. Even if effect of soft soap can be neglected a month may be too short a time to decide the future effect of Luxess face cream. As we know, we should need a long-term evaluation of a cosmetic product before we can safely claim it is helpful. Perhaps the product tested is effective in a short period, but can not ameliorate the long-term face condition and even possibly aggravate the present problems.

In sum, as the above discussions, the argument has so many patent flaws that it needs more information to support the statement. First of all, the arguer should provide more detailed information of the survey and persuade us to believe this survey’s credibility, moreover rule out the possible effect of the soft soap. To better evaluate the research, the author should give the long-term effect about the product.