Project+1+-+Letter+to+the+Editor

Editor: In response to Justin Rastelli’s article titled, “Smokers Losing Rights” I strongly disagree with the stance he takes on the law. Smoking is long overdue to be regulated. The only regulation for smokers currently is that they cannot smoke inside a public building or office and that is it. I think it’s about time that legislation was proposed to start limiting smokers more and diminishing the damage of this nasty addiction. //Rastelli exaggerates the law saying that citizens couldn’t smoke in their own houses, yet the law only allows landlords to evict people who have had complaints filed against them about smoking.// Just because an individual decides to light up inside their apartment doesn’t mean that the individuals in the surrounding apartments must suffer from the second hand smoke. If the smoke is unbearable to other members living in the same complex as a smoker than I believe it isn’t to extreme to allow the landlord to evict this smoker if members file complaints about them. It seems as if thoughtfulness and courtesy is dying off and people don’t seem to care if they negatively affect others with their bad habits. This law is a ray of light that would help bring back some of that courtesy, and also aid in preventing the smokers from ruining others days with their habit.

Chris Hogan, freshman, Business

**Zach Lecomte**

**Assignment--**Great + You can tell you put a lot of thought and good amount of time into this paper and followed the criteria well.

**Focus**-- Great + Stayed on topic well and supported your main point throughout the paper. + Demonstrated your interest in the topic with a passion for your belief + information was relevant to topic.

+ Had good beginning, middle and end. + Clearly explained the purpose of your paper. + Good format.
 * Organization--**Great

+ Great information to support your stance. + Nice job appealing to the readers. + Went into detail. - Your information seemed one-sided and almost bias agent smokers.
 * Support--** Good

+ Nice use of different words for smoking. + Grammar overall was sound. + No spelling errors to my knowledge.
 * Proofreading--** Great

-- Overall this paper was very well done, the only thing you could have done better was the way you delivered your information agents smoking. It is important to be passionate with your work, but you were overbearing at times to the point that it seemed smokers did not deserve a choice in the matter. Other then that great job, this is by far the best paper in the group.

Madison Syltebo

You did a really great Letter to the Editor the inly thing I would fix is maybe acknowledge the other side f the argument.

Assignment: You did a really good job following all the guidelines to the assignment. Focus: Very good, it is easy to see your position and you stuck to it throughout your letter to the editor, but I think that your thesis could be stronger. Good use of language. Organization: nice flow and transitions throughout the letter Support: Good support with detail but when you use the example of people smoking at apartments it wasn't very clear if that was an example from your article or if you came up with it. Proofreading: Good use of verbs and transitions in the paper. There is no awkwardness in it.

Chelsea McLean Assignment: You seemed to care a lot about your topic which made it very interesting to read! Focus: Stayed on topic. Strong thesis. Organization: Had a clear opening, body, and conclusion. Maybe develop the body paragraph a little more. Support: Used good information from article to appeal to your side of the argument. You had a very strong stance against smokers and did a good job appealing your ideas to the reader. proofreading: Flows very nicely, and has good word choice!

Deome - First, good feedback everyone! This is the kind of detailed feedback I like to see. As for revision, the only thing I have to add is that you'll probably want to rethink or support your statement that there's only one law affecting smokers. I know, from experience, just how many laws and policies there are that affect smokers, and it's more than one.