The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
-
January 23, 2020 at 1:52 pm
The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
At first look at the recommendation, it is quite plausible to blame the skateboarding for the problems happened in the Central Plaza. However, some claims in this letter rely on unsound assumptions. In order to establish the recommendation better, there are some questions needing to be answered.
First of all, the letter says that the decrease of the shopper and the increase of the skateboarding happen at the same time so that it leads us to blame the skateboarder. But Is the decrease number of the shoppers really related to the skateboarding? Maybe there is a new shopping mall in the city, and as all we know, human beings always love the new thing which can bring the excitement. Besides, the new shopping mall might have better facilities and cheaper price goods, which can offer customers a better shopping experience. So we can assume that the new shopping mall attracts the shoppers. Thus, the number of the Central Plaza shoppers have decreasing for two years. We need specific connection between the skateboarding and shoppers.
Second, the recommendation also blames the increase of litter and vandalism on skateboarding. Again, the assumption relies on the unwarranted evidence. The increase of the litter and vandalism might not relate to the skateboarding due to we do not have clear evidence. Maybe the litter and vandalism are made by the homeless and workless people. As all we know, those people are more likely to commit crimes. Besides, the skateboarding needs a good and clean place because their wheels will not smoothly slide on a bumpy ground. We need further information about the number of homeless people and skateboarding and the connection between them and the litter and vandalism.
Finally, allowing the skateboarding do have connection with the decreasing number of the shoppers and the litter and vandalism, can the prohibition of the skateboarding will bring the Central Plaza to its previously levels. Maybe the Central Plaza is notorious for those problems stated above and the reputation will not recover at a short time, because the bad thing always runs faster than the good thing dose. Even though the shoppers are back to the previous level, it cannot promise that the revenue can back to the same. We need a firm ground to establish the claim.
In short, until we have a further information about the Central Plaza and firm evidence which can support the recommendation convincingly, there will not be a prudent conclusion. We need the information discussed and the answers to the question asked above to better evaluate the recommendation.
January 23, 2020 at 3:18 pmScore: 63
Issues:
- About 45% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems/errors.
January 24, 2020 at 1:44 amAt first look at the recommendation, it is entirely plausible to blame the skateboarding for the problems happened in the Central Plaza. However, some claims in this letter rely on unsound assumptions. In order to establish the recommendation better, there should be answers to some questions.
First of all, the letter says that the decrease of the shopper and the increase of the skateboarding happen at the same time so that it leads us to blame the skateboarder. But Is the declining number of the shoppers really related to the popularity of skateboarding? Maybe there is a new shopping mall in the city, and as all we know, human beings always love the new thing which can bring the freshness. Besides, the new shopping mall might have better facilities and cheaper price goods, which can offer customers better shopping experience. So we can assume that the new shopping mall attracts the customers. Thus, the number of Central Plaza shoppers have decreased for two years. We need clear connection between the skateboarding and shoppers.
Second, the recommendation also blames the increase of litter and vandalism on skateboarding. Again, the assumption relies on the defective evidence. The increase of the litter and vandalism might not relate to the skateboarding due to we do not have clear evidence. Maybe the litter and vandalism are made by the homeless and workless people. As all we know, those people are more likely to commit crimes. Besides, the skateboarding needs a good and clean place because their wheels will not smoothly slide on bumpy ground. We need further information about the number of homeless people and skateboarding, and the connection between them and the litter and vandalism.
Finally, allowing the skateboarding do have relation with the decreasing number of the shoppers and the litter and vandalism, can the prohibition of the skateboarding will bring the Central Plaza to its previous levels? Maybe the Central Plaza is notorious for those problems stated above and the reputation will not recover in a short time, because the bad thing always runs faster than the good thing dose. Even though the shoppers are back to the previous level, it cannot promise that the revenue can back to the same. We need a firm ground to establish the claim.
In short, until we have further information about the Central Plaza and firm evidence which would support the recommendation convincingly, there will not be a prudent conclusion. We need the information discussed and the answers to the question asked above to better evaluate the recommendation.
January 25, 2020 at 11:21 pmScore: 49.1
January 21, 2020
To Whom It May Concern:
Thank you very much for your letter concerning prohibiting skateboarding activities at Central Plaza! It is our priority to allow all businesses in our city to express their concerns.
At [ article error ] first look at the/your recommendation, it is entirely plausible to blame the skateboarding for the problems that happened in the Central Plaza. However, some claims in this letter rely on unsound assumptions. In order to establish the recommendation better, there should be answers to some questions.
First of all, the letter says that the decrease of the shopper and the increase of the skateboarding happen [tense error ]at the same time so that it leads [ tense error ]us to blame the skateboarder. But Is [ spelling error ]the declining number of the [article error ]shoppers really related to the popularity of skateboarding? Maybe there is a new shopping mall in the city[ unclear ], and as all we know, human beings always love the new things which can bring the freshness. Besides, the new shopping mall might have better facilities and cheaper price goods, which can offer customers [ article error ]better shopping experience. So we can assume that the new shopping mall attracts the customers. Thus, the number of Central Plaza shoppers have decreased for two years. We need[ article error ] clear connection between the skateboarding and shoppers.
Second, the recommendation also blames the increase of litter and vandalism
on[resulted from ] skateboarding. Again, the assumption relies on the[article error ] defective evidence. The increase of the litter and vandalism might not relate to the skateboarding due to [ wrong phrase ]we do not have clear evidence. Maybe the litter and vandalism are [ tense error ]made by the homeless and workless people. (As all we know)[ factual error-maybe ‘I’ don’t know ], those people are more likely to commit crimes. Besides, the skateboarding needs a good and clean place because their[ unclear pronoun ] wheels will not smoothly slide on bumpy ground. We need further information about the number of homeless people and skateboarding[word form error ], and the connection between them[unclear pronoun ] and the litter and vandalism.Finally, allowing the skateboarding do [ grammatical error ]have relation with the decreasing number of the shoppers and the litter and vandalism, can the prohibition of the skateboarding will[ grammatical error ] bring the Central Plaza to its previous levels? Maybe the Central Plaza is notorious[big word in a warm letter ] for those problems stated above [ punctuation error concerning coordinating word ]and the reputation will not recover in a short time, [ punctuation error]because the bad thing always runs faster than the good thing dose. Even though the shoppers are back to the previous level[ unclear ], it [ unclear pronoun ]cannot promise that the revenue can back [informal ]to the same[ unclear ]. We need a firm ground to establish the claim[ what claim? ].
In short, until we have further information about the Central Plaza and firm evidence which would support the recommendation convincingly, (there will not be a prudent conclusion)[unclear ]. We need the information discussed and the answers to the question asked above to better evaluate the recommendation.
Thank you very much for your attention!
Sincerely
Summary: this is a cold, inconsiderate letter that could further anger the shop owner and therefore facilitate the confrontation between businesses and the municipal government. Use WARM words and SHORTEN sentences to pacify the shop owner.
January 26, 2020 at 3:05 amAt first sight of the recommendation, it is entirely plausible to blame the skateboarding for the problems happened in the Central Plaza. However, some claims in this letter rely on unsound assumptions. In order to establish the recommendation better, there should be answers to some questions.
First of all, the letter says that the decrease of the shopper and the increase of the skateboarding happened at the same time so that it leads us to blame the skateboarder. But is the declining number of shoppers really related to the popularity of skateboarding? Maybe there is a new shopping mall in the city, and as all we know, human beings always love the new things which can bring the freshness. Besides, the new shopping mall might have better facilities and cheaper price goods, which can offer customers a better shopping experience. So we can assume that the new shopping mall attracts the customers. Thus, the number of Central Plaza shoppers have decreased for two years. We need the clear connection between the skateboarding and shoppers.
Second, the recommendation also claims that the increase of litter and vandalism resulted from skateboarding. Again, the assumption relies on defective evidence. The increase of the litter and vandalism might not relate to the skateboarding due to unreliable evidence. Maybe the litter and vandalism were made by the homeless and workless people. In the eyes of many of us, those people are more likely to commit crimes. Besides, the skateboarding needs a good and clean place because the wheels of the skateboard will not smoothly slide on bumpy ground. We need factual information about the correlation of the litter and vandalism and its cause.
Finally, allowing the skateboarding does have relation with the decreasing number of the shoppers and the litter and vandalism, can the prohibition of the skateboarding bring the Central Plaza business to its previous levels? Maybe the Central Plaza is disreputable for those problems stated above, and the reputation will not recover in a short time because the bad thing always runs faster than the good thing dose. Even though the shoppers are back to its previous levels, it cannot promise that the business can return to its previously high levels. We need a firm ground to establish the claim.
In short, unless we have further information about the Central Plaza and firm evidence which would support the recommendation convincingly, there will not be a persuasive proposal. We need the information discussed and the answers to the question asked above to better evaluate the recommendation.
