3. What is the main argument of the passage? What claims does the author make to support the argument? How valid, relevant, and sufficient is the reasoning and evidence used to support the argument and claims? Does the author use false statements or fallacious reasoning to support the argument and claims? Use evidence from the text to support your response. Your evaluation of the argument should be two or three complete paragraphs. I WILL FLAG ANY UNNECESSARY ANSWERS. PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY ANSWER ARE THE ONES WHO DESERVE POINTS

The main argument of the passage is discussed below in details.

Explanation:

Social media is, nevertheless, a good alternative to stay in touch with colleagues and family who reside far away. But if we concentrate more on the characters online than those who are nearby corporally, or if we let our colleagues who are near become online patrons only, then we have a difficulty. We can manage those online associations, but we should never replace them with real-life agreements with people with whom we can communicate and do stuff in person.

this is an ad? the hell is your audience bro xd

explanation:

the word that best matches the meaning of the expression "went to the big ocean" is died.

the goldfish died, which is why the father looks at the children mournfully. the "big ocean" is the father's way of saying fish heaven. he could have just said that the goldfish died, but this way, the children imagine the fish in a bigger, better place instead of just picturing a dead fish.

explanation: