My argument

     Occasionally the ESRB rating system is flawed in what a game gets. T rating and M ratings have very similar criteria. Certain games that should receive an AO rating get an M due to sloppy rating. 

    My strongest evidence is that the criteria for an M rating is similar to a T rating. Because M rating requires an adult present to buy it and a T rating dosen't, there is a bigger consequence for an improper rating. These two ratings should separate more to avoid a parent unintentionally buying a game that they don't seem fit for their child.

    My weakest evidence is the difference between an M rating and AO. The age requirement between the two is only 1 year, but the criteria for each is much more vast than a T and M. This isn't also as much of a parental concern than the previous argument. It is there just to give better examples of how there have been mistakes by the ESRB.