Smithtown University's fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted. This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job. On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.
Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument?
Smithtown University's fund-raisers were successful in their contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people.
This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown University from new donors when the university's fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before.
This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university's fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors.
The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before.
More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University's fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.
募款筹集者成功的从和他联系了的80%的募捐者中得到了捐款,因为很多人都是以前捐过款的,所以不能代表就是good。
那么如果是要增强,就要说明他游说到的那些人都是捐款过款的。
A:S大学的筹集者在和那些从来没捐过款的人取得联系的成功率上和其它学校的募集者成功率差不多,意思就是仅仅是平均水平,不能说明good。
C:没有游说就来捐款了,但是题目要讨论的是游说了的人捐款的成功率,所以可以算是跳出讨论范畴了
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论