argument117 熊熊互拍组 -- yurong84 第二次对付阿狗！有拍必回！

yurong84UID：2120087

第二次写——
希望大虾们狠狠拍砖！！

发现改了一遍后，加了一百来字
还是辩不透彻，词不达意！
郁闷中……

欢迎各位指教
必当回拍致谢！！

--------------------------------------------------------------
提纲：
1、survey-------可信度和代表性------能否推得家庭办公者数目的上升？
2、stores--------在家办公人员是否一定对 officy-supply 有需求？是否会选择Valu-Mart ？
3、the most profitable component -------其他影响销售的因素？其他部门的状况？--------------------------------------------------------------

117．The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores
"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they
are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they
were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office
-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at
-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office
machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax
machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper,
pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will
become the most profitable component of our stores."
最近一次调查超过70％的回应者报告说他们被要求回家完成的工作量比以前多。由于Valu-Mart在过去并没有发现办公用品部销量的显著上升，我们应该利用这种在家办公的趋势，在所有Valu-Mart商店增加家庭办公机器比如打印机、小型复印机、碎纸机和传真机的存货。我们也将增加办公用品比如纸笔和钉书机的存货。通过这些变革，我们办公用品部将会成为我们商店中盈利最多的部门。
-----------------------------------------------------------------


In this argument, the arguer suggest the office- supply departments to increase the stock of home office machines as well as the stock of office supplies in order to make this department the most profitable component of his stores. To support his argument, the arguer mainly provides two reasons, one is based on the survey which shows a requirement to increasing the hours working home, the other is that there is no such needs in the past. But unfortunately, I find several crucial faults lie in this issue, which I would point out in turn.

First, the arguer assumes that more people will be work at home, which provided the company with a good opportunity, as a basic of the argument. The only reason given was the survey, which seems to be reasonable, but fails to support this assumption for there’s no more information accompany. On the one hand, the reliability of the survey is doubtful since we can draw nothing more about the survey, such as the select of interviewees, the number of the sample, or the area it covers. As a result, we cannot assess the representative of the survey. What if it just reveal the condition of a small portion or even deal with people dwelling in another state?. On the other hand, even if the survey has been efficiently carried out, and the require for workers to do more work home does exist, how can the arguer asserts that the workers will followed this requirement? Maybe that's just the employer's wish, which can’t be put into practice.

Secondly, the arguer asserts that increasing the department's stock can meet the need of those people who work at home, which is also an unwarranted suggestion. It is highly possible that such need does not exist at all, for the jobs requested to be done at home may calls for nothing like printers or paper, but computers, telephones or some other devices. Even if people need such devices, they might be able to get them from their own office or other particular shop, as the sale also depends on different taste of customers. Without a investigation into these matters, the conclusion is unfounded.

Furthermore, the arguer foretell the profit with too optimistic a mind, whereas he failed to considering all the potential disadvantages they might confront, nor establishes a comparability between the office-supply departments with the other components. Above all, the profit depends on varies factors. Supposed that the cost for all the stores to amplify their stock might add to the total expense vastly, even exceed the rising of their incoming. At the same time, I think he has precluded the existence of other company which provides similar goods and has predominate this market for long, leaving no chance for Valu-Mart. What’s more, the store haven’t experience a large need in office-supplies before can not demonstrate the new trend as a auspice, even if it is, it can’t guarantee the sale of office-applies to be the most profitable component without sufficiently compare with other department.

To sum up, the arguer failed to make a good reasoning for his argument, so that the conclusion is suspectable. To convince me of his opinion, he should list precise statistics about the survey, prove the relationship between the increasing of home work and the need for office devices properly, along with more information of Valu-Mart store and its competitors.

weimangUID：2118273

In this argument, the arguer suggests the office- supply departments to increase the stock of home office machines as well as the stock of office supplies in order to make this department the most profitable component of his stores. To support his argument, the arguer mainly provides two reasons: one is based on the survey which shows a requirement to increase the hours working home, while the other is that there is no such needs in the past. But unfortunately, I find several crucial faults lie in this issue, which I would point out in turn.

First, the arguer assumes that more people will be work at home, which provided the company with a good opportunity, as a basic of the argument. The only reason given was the survey, which seems to be reasonable, but fails to support this assumption for there’s no more information accompany(accordingly). On the(删去the) one hand, the reliability of the survey is doubtful since we can draw nothing more about(from) the survey, such as the select of interviewees, the number of the sample, or the area it covers. As a result, we cannot assess the representative of the survey. What if it just reveal the condition of a small portion or even deal with people dwelling in another state?. On the other hand, even if the survey has been efficiently carried out, and the require for workers to do more work home does exist, how can the arguer asserts that the workers will followed this requirement? Maybe that's just the employer's wish, which can’t be put into practice.

Secondly, the arguer asserts that increasing the department's stock can meet the need of those people who work at home, which is also an unwarranted suggestion(assumption). It is highly possible that such need does not exist at all, for the jobs requested to be done at home may calls for nothing like printers or paper, but computers, telephones or some other devices. Even if people need such devices, they might be able to get them from their own office or other particular shop, as the sale also depends on different taste of customers. Without a investigation into these matters, the conclusion is unfounded.

Furthermore, the arguer foretell the profit with too optimistic a mind, whereas he failed to considering all the potential disadvantages they might confront, nor establishes a comparability between the office-supply departments with the other components. Above all, the profit depends on varies factors. Supposed that the cost for all the stores to amplify their stock might add to the total expense vastly, even exceed the rising of their incoming. At the same time, I think he has precluded the existence of other company which provides similar goods and has predominate this market for(删去for) long before, leaving no chance(oppotunity) for Valu-Mart. What’s more, the store haven’t experienced a large need in office-supplies before, which can not demonstrate the new trend as a auspice(资助赞助？), even if it is, it can’t guarantee the sale of office-applies to be the most profitable component without sufficiently compare with other department.

To sum up, the arguer failed to make a good reasoning for his argument, so that the conclusion is suspectable. To convince me of his opinion, he should list precise statistics about the survey, (and) prove the relationship between the increasing of home work and the need for office devices properly, along with more information of Valu-Mart store and its competitors.

sebarinaUID：2108158

In this argument, the arguer suggests the office- supply departments to increase the stock of home office machines as well as the stock of office supplies in order to make this department the most profitable component of his stores. To support his argument, the arguer mainly provides two reasons, one is based on the survey which shows a requirement to increasing the hours working home, the other is that there is no such needs in the past. But unfortunately, I find several crucial faults lie inlie是动词吧？ this issue, which I would point out in turn觉得不地道.

First, the arguer assumes that more people will be work at home, which provided the company with介词好像有问题r a good opportunity, as a basic of the argument. The only reason given was时态怎么搞得？ the survey, which seems to be reasonable, but fails to support this assumption for there’s no more information accompany. On the one hand, the reliability of the survey is doubtful since we can draw nothing more about aboutthe survey, such as the select of interviewees, the number of the sample, or the area it covers. 例子不错As a result, we cannot assess the representative of the survey. What if it just reveal the condition of a small portion or even deal with people dwelling in another state?. On the other hand, even if the survey has been efficiently carried out, and the require for workers to do more work home does exist, how can the arguer asserts that the workers will followed this requirement?这个是个大的错误值得展开的 Maybe that's just the employer's wish, which can’t be put into practice.

Secondly, the arguer asserts that increasing the department's stock can meet the need of those people who work at home, which is also an unwarranted suggestion. It is highly possible that such need does not exist at all, for the jobs requested to be done at home may calls for nothing like printers or paper, but computers, telephones or some other devices. Even if people need such devices, they might be able to get them from their own office or other particular shop, as the sale also depends on different taste of customers. Without a investigation into these matters, the conclusion is unfounded.这段不错~但是觉得语言很不地道都是自己排列组合的

Furthermore,further即可~典型没有听课 the arguer foretell在看到这种语法错误我就不拍了！ the profit with too optimistic a mind, whereas he failed to considering all the potential disadvantages they might confront, nor establishes a comparability between the office-supply departments with the other components.超级无敌大长句 Above all, the profit depends on varies factors. Supposed that the cost for all the stores to amplify their stock might add to the total expense vastly, even exceed the rising of their incoming. At the same time, I think heor she没听课 has precluded the existence of other company which provides similar goods and has predominate this market for long, leaving no chance for Valu-Mart. What’s more, the store haven’t experience a large need in office-supplies before主从that引导比较好 can not demonstrate the new trend as a auspice, even if it is, it can’t guarantee the sale of office-applies to be the most profitable component without sufficiently compare with other department加不加S？熊熊要怒了~这种错误太多了.

To sum up, the arguer failed to make a good reasoning for his argument, so that the conclusion is suspectable. To convince me of his opinion, he should list precise statistics about the survey, prove the relationship between the increasing of home work and the need for office devices properly, along with more information of Valu-Mart store and its competitors.结尾不错

----------------------------
用word检查不是把红红绿绿弄没救可以了
自己读一读想一想~这种语法错误还存在就不要让人改了