Project+1+-+Edit+1

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. One of the few regulations for smokers currently is that they cannot smoke inside of a public building or office. This law may seem strong, yet there do not seem to be many strong laws such as these. I think it’s about time that legislation was proposed to start limiting smokers more and diminishing the damage to others caused by 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 create a law that allows landlords to evict smokers if members in surrounding rooms 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

Madison Syltebo

You did a really great Letter to the Editor but still talk a little more about what the author of this article's opinion was on smoking.

Assignment: You did a really good job following all the guidelines to the assignment. You did a good job editing the language and making the assignment overall stronger. I think that you should try to elaborate a little more and make your letter longer. 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. Your purpose is very clear but explain the other side a little more. Organization: nice flow and transitions throughout the letter. You did a nice job making all the paragraphs have a purpose that makes your argument develop even more. You did a nice job editing the sentences and making them balance. Support: Good support with detail but I would maybe integrate a quote from your article to better support your opinion. Proofreading: Good use of verbs and transitions in the paper. There is no awkwardness in your writing. Free of grammatical errors that I could see but for further edits you could send your letter to the writing center online for more comments.

Carson Smallbeck- When starting your letter, it might help your readers to explain a little more about the article that you are responding to. You say that you disagree with his stance on smoking, what is his stance? It would be cool if you still had the article to add a link to it in the letter. You do a good job of stating your stance on the issue and explining the law that is currently in place. The flow of the letter seems logical, however a stronger conclusion could add a lot to your letter; maybe add what you want to happen? You slightly add a naysayer in the first paragraph, it may help you if you make this naysayer stronger. Finally reread your letter for proofreading, there were are few missing words and mistakes. Overall, good job on making your opinion stand out in the letter.