While it covers important ground , I think the arguments need more refinement and focus before they can inspire productive discussion	['non', 'pro', 'pro', 'pro', 'pro', 'non', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con']	paper quality