[問題] AWA-argument問題
想請問一下大家，
認為以下這題augument，有哪些可以提出討論的點？
這題是高頻題中出現次數最多的，但這兩年都沒出現過。
看了兩遍，覺得文章說的挺有道理。
EZ這家公司的服務確實比較好啊，
換算下來，EZ一次的收費只要$312，ABC要$500。
請問還可以從哪些論點上去探討呢？ (極度懷疑自己的智商中...)
7. (方老師package的題號)
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."
下面出自一封給Walnut Grove城鎮報編輯的信上。
"Walnut Grove的鎮議會已經主張由
EZ Diposal﹝已經取得Walnut Grove未來十年垃圾收集服務的合約﹞更換為ABC Waste，
因為EZ最近將每月的費用由$2,000提高到$2,500，而ABC的費用仍舊是$2,000。但鎮議會
搞錯了；我們應該繼續使用EZ才對。EZ每星期收集兩次垃圾，但ABC只有一次。此外，EZ
﹝目前和ABC一樣有個20輛卡車的車隊﹞已經訂購了額外的卡車。最後，EZ提供優良服務
：去年的城鎮民調中八成應答者同意他們「滿意」EZ的工作。
謝謝大家！
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.111.230.236
※ 編輯: naominov 來自: 140.111.230.236 (03/24 15:12)
推
03/24 17:49, , 1F
03/24 17:49, 1F
推
03/24 17:52, , 2F
03/24 17:52, 2F
→
03/24 17:53, , 3F
03/24 17:53, 3F
推
03/24 23:12, , 4F
03/24 23:12, 4F