Mencken vs. Kroll

I find Kroll's essay to be more persuasive because of his heavy use of ethos, and narrative structure, which leaves less room for him to supply false logic. Mencken used flashy examples and beautified his opinion, while blatantly discrediting the opposing argument, but without supplying any legitimate or even logical reasons for it's incredibility. Kroll reads to the audience his personal account of a hideous and disgusting experience, obviously showing his opinion on the matter through his depiction of the scenario, but decidedly leaving the audience to make their own judgements.