What is the conclusion?

some thing must be done or so, Anti S regulations must be enacted to to stop unsolicited advertising

The word so and the logical order says that the latter is the C

Down to A & B, I will chose A as it more seems like the background than part of evidence.

Part 2 is the conclusion/inference. So, only A and B remain. The first part is not an evidence; it's a statement that tells us how things were in the past. So, B is out. A should be it.

Something must be done to stop spam. In early days, people seldom received unsolicited email advertisement; but now that numerous bulk email software and email address finders are developed to collect email address all around the world. Advertisers use email addresses to market their products and even sell such email lists to other advertisers. As a result, almost everyone ever get junk email, and sometime several and even tens of annoying emails a day. So, relevant anti-spam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


My Explanation:

Premise 1: In early days, people seldom received unsolicited email advertisement.

Premise 2: but now that numerous bulk email software and email address finders are developed to collect email address all around the world.

Premise 3: Advertisers use email addresses to market their products and even sell such email lists to other advertisers.

Premise 4: As a result, almost everyone ever get junk email, and sometime several and even tens of annoying emails a day.

Conclusion: Something must be done to stop spam.

Conclusion/Inference: So, relevant anti-spam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising.
---> Conclusion because it uses the keyword 'So'
---> Inference because the first sentence of the passage looks more as a conclusion than this one i.e., the second boldfaced statement.

On the basis of above info, we can eliminate at least option C, D & E. Now we have only options A & B left.

If we assume that option A is correct, then the second boldface statement should be the conclusion but IMO, the first statement of the passage should be the conclusion. Also, if you go through option A, it states that the first boldface is a 'Background that the argument depends on'. Do you really think that the argument (conclusion) depends on the first boldface? Had that not been present, we could have still arrived at the conclusion with the help of remaining premises. If anything, the first boldface should only act as a supporting premise.

------------------------
A. Background that the argument depends on and conclusion that can be drawn from the argument. ---> Explained above.

B. Part of evidence that the argument includes, and inference that can be drawn from this passage. ---> Explained above.

C. Pre-evidence that the argument depends on and part of evidence that supports the conclusion. ---> Second boldface is a conclusion/inference. So, discard it.

D. Background that argument depends on and part of evidence that supports the conclusion. ---> Second boldface is a conclusion/inference. So, discard it.

E. Pre-evidence that argument includes and a method that helps to supports that conclusion. ---> Second boldface is a conclusion/inference. So, discard it.
------------------------

So, by process of elimination, I go for option B.

IMO, the options are not worded correctly. Is it from a GMAT source?


Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Technext, you might be right, but what I gather from this passage is that the author is comparing the present situation with the almost spam free world that used to exist in the past. This comparison is vital for the argument, as without knowing how things were before, how would you decide that it's time to pull the plug on spammers.. So, I choose A.

Nitya, the url is this page itself

Hi sanjay_gmat,


IMO, argument here is the first statement of the passage. If I’m correct then the comparison should not be vital to reach the conclusion (argument). I feel that we can reach the conclusion without its (first boldface) help too.

Let others share their thought on this.


Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Ohh

post473413.html
post47029.html#p47029
post157318.html#p157318

_________________

math-polygons-87336.html
competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Even I am not totally convinced that the second boldface is an inference. This option was the choice solely based on process of elimination.

This doesn't look like a GMAT question. Can we have the source rampuria?


Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

I dont think it's a garbage
One more evidence to choose B rather than A is that "relevant anti-spam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising" is only a suggestion, so can be considered inference, not a conclusion.