Free GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY Exam Braindumps

On May 5th, 1997, the European edition of Business Tech Magazine led with Hoffman’s cover story "Internet Communities: How they’re Shaping Electronic Commerce". This cover story highlights the extent to which the term virtual community has become almost synonymous with various forms of group-CMCs (computer mediated communication), including email-list forums, chat-systems such as IRC, web-based discussion areas and UseNet news-groups. There was no debate in the Business Tech Magazine article as to whether the group-CMC discussions are really 'communities', rather how community as opposed to content can be used to encourage people to return to a particular part of cyberspace for commercial gain. In a similar vein, Simpson and Armstrong in "Internet Gain" argue that ignoring virtual communities would be a great loss of a marketing tool for businesses. They define virtual communities as computer mediated space where there is an integration of content and communication with an emphasis on member-generated content.
Not all virtual community commentators agree with the Spartan position taken by Hoffman. Rheingold, one of the prime popularizes of the term virtual community, provides us with a more emotive definition in his book The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. According to Rheingold, "virtual communities are social aggregations that emerge from the Net when enough people carry on those public discussions long enough, with sufficient human feeling, to form webs of personal relationships in cyberspace". Rheingold's definition is extremely popular and has been quoted in many discussions about virtual communities. As discussed below, for social scientists, particularly sociologists, Rheingold's definition raises many issues, especially concerning the notion of community. This is because Rheingold argues via a variety of analogies from the real world such as homesteading that virtual communities are indeed new forms of "community". In fact, Rheingold implies that virtual communities are actually "a kind of ultimate flowering of community".
Moreover, Rheingold maintains that whenever computer mediated communications technology becomes available; people inevitably create communities with it. Rheingold can thus be labeled as a technological determinist as he holds that there is a predictable relationship between technology and people's behavior.
The debate over the validity of Rheingold's position has raised doubts about the existence of virtual communities and the appropriate use of the term. Weinreich claims that the idea of virtual communities must be wrong because community is a collective of kinship networks that share a common geographic region, a common history, and a shared value system, usually rooted in a common religion. In other words, Weinreich rejects the existence of virtual communities because group-CMC discussions cannot possibly meet his definition. In Weinreich's view, anyone with even a basic knowledge of sociology understands that information exchange in no way constitutes a community.

According to Simpson and Armstrong, virtual communities

On May 5th, 1997, the European edition of Business Tech Magazine led with Hoffman’s cover story "Internet Communities: How they’re Shaping Electronic Commerce". This cover story highlights the extent to which the term virtual community has become almost synonymous with various forms of group-CMCs (computer mediated communication), including email-list forums, chat-systems such as IRC, web-based discussion areas and UseNet news-groups. There was no debate in the Business Tech Magazine article as to whether the group-CMC discussions are really 'communities', rather how community as opposed to content can be used to encourage people to return to a particular part of cyberspace for commercial gain. In a similar vein, Simpson and Armstrong in "Internet Gain" argue that ignoring virtual communities would be a great loss of a marketing tool for businesses. They define virtual communities as computer mediated space where there is an integration of content and communication with an emphasis on member-generated content.
Not all virtual community commentators agree with the Spartan position taken by Hoffman. Rheingold, one of the prime popularizes of the term virtual community, provides us with a more emotive definition in his book The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. According to Rheingold, "virtual communities are social aggregations that emerge from the Net when enough people carry on those public discussions long enough, with sufficient human feeling, to form webs of personal relationships in cyberspace". Rheingold's definition is extremely popular and has been quoted in many discussions about virtual communities. As discussed below, for social scientists, particularly sociologists, Rheingold's definition raises many issues, especially concerning the notion of community. This is because Rheingold argues via a variety of analogies from the real world such as homesteading that virtual communities are indeed new forms of "community". In fact, Rheingold implies that virtual communities are actually "a kind of ultimate flowering of community".
Moreover, Rheingold maintains that whenever computer mediated communications technology becomes available; people inevitably create communities with it. Rheingold can thus be labeled as a technological determinist as he holds that there is a predictable relationship between technology and people's behavior.
The debate over the validity of Rheingold's position has raised doubts about the existence of virtual communities and the appropriate use of the term. Weinreich claims that the idea of virtual communities must be wrong because community is a collective of kinship networks that share a common geographic region, a common history, and a shared value system, usually rooted in a common religion. In other words, Weinreich rejects the existence of virtual communities because group-CMC discussions cannot possibly meet his definition. In Weinreich's view, anyone with even a basic knowledge of sociology understands that information exchange in no way constitutes a community.

Weinreich rejects Rheingold’s inclusion of virtual communities in the definition of communities for all of the following reasons EXCEPT

On May 5th, 1997, the European edition of Business Tech Magazine led with Hoffman’s cover story "Internet Communities: How they’re Shaping Electronic Commerce". This cover story highlights the extent to which the term virtual community has become almost synonymous with various forms of group-CMCs (computer mediated communication), including email-list forums, chat-systems such as IRC, web-based discussion areas and UseNet news-groups. There was no debate in the Business Tech Magazine article as to whether the group-CMC discussions are really 'communities', rather how community as opposed to content can be used to encourage people to return to a particular part of cyberspace for commercial gain. In a similar vein, Simpson and Armstrong in "Internet Gain" argue that ignoring virtual communities would be a great loss of a marketing tool for businesses. They define virtual communities as computer mediated space where there is an integration of content and communication with an emphasis on member-generated content.
Not all virtual community commentators agree with the Spartan position taken by Hoffman. Rheingold, one of the prime popularizes of the term virtual community, provides us with a more emotive definition in his book The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. According to Rheingold, "virtual communities are social aggregations that emerge from the Net when enough people carry on those public discussions long enough, with sufficient human feeling, to form webs of personal relationships in cyberspace". Rheingold's definition is extremely popular and has been quoted in many discussions about virtual communities. As discussed below, for social scientists, particularly sociologists, Rheingold's definition raises many issues, especially concerning the notion of community. This is because Rheingold argues via a variety of analogies from the real world such as homesteading that virtual communities are indeed new forms of "community". In fact, Rheingold implies that virtual communities are actually "a kind of ultimate flowering of community".
Moreover, Rheingold maintains that whenever computer mediated communications technology becomes available; people inevitably create communities with it. Rheingold can thus be labeled as a technological determinist as he holds that there is a predictable relationship between technology and people's behavior.
The debate over the validity of Rheingold's position has raised doubts about the existence of virtual communities and the appropriate use of the term. Weinreich claims that the idea of virtual communities must be wrong because community is a collective of kinship networks that share a common geographic region, a common history, and a shared value system, usually rooted in a common religion. In other words, Weinreich rejects the existence of virtual communities because group-CMC discussions cannot possibly meet his definition. In Weinreich's view, anyone with even a basic knowledge of sociology understands that information exchange in no way constitutes a community

The author says ‘there was no debate in the Business Tech Magazine article’ to emphasize which of the following points?

Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?
Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect.
Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. A hot spot, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Niño cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homorganic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homorganic origin"?

In this passage the author is primarily interested in