It is true that we have heard reports of selfless generosity and kindness of past people.
However, it is baseless to say that people in the past time were more friendly. My standpoint is that people nowadays are more willing to help others due to technology and wealth. I will illustrate my points of view in the following two parts.
First of all, with the advancement in technology, it is more easier to pass on friendness. People have various technological means to offer help. In morfem-day China, social media apps and website have made it easier foe users to link their bank and Alipay accounts. The act of givind has become as easy as a few clicks on a smartphone without any cash changing hands. After you see news of some tradegy on TV, by scanning the barcode with your phone’s camera, you can donate immediately. This was impossible in the past. Social media has also made it easier to disseminate information about charities with a wider outreach, When one shares a link to a charitie site, and that share get shared and reshared by one’s friends, the effect is exponential.
Additionally, living standards have improved enormouly and this makes helping others possible. Basically, good economic times have resulted in people becoming more financially capable of supporting the causes they believe in. It is a given that people with more disposable income are more likely and in a better position to develop a desire to help others. Donations people make, ranging from clothes no longer worn anf books unread to unwanted furniture they want to replace, definitely help others who are less fortunate.
To sum it up, people are more helpful for two reasons: better financial condition and advanced technology.
- In the past people were more friendly than they are today. Do you agree or disagree with the statement? 71
- In the past people were more friendly than they are today Do you agree or disagree with the statement 78
- Taking a lot of time to make an important decision is often considered as a bad quality for a person. However, some people think that is a good quality for a person 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 51, Rule ID: PAST_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'pastime'?
Suggestion: pastime
...t is baseless to say that people in the past time were more friendly. My standpoint is th...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 57, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'easier' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: easier
...th the advancement in technology, it is more easier to pass on friendness. People have vari...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, so, first of all, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 9.8082437276 20% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 52.1666666667 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1453.0 1977.66487455 73% => OK
No of words: 290.0 407.700716846 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.01034482759 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.48103885553 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72941653572 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 212.727598566 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.637931034483 0.524837075471 122% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 618.680645161 75% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.526734934 48.9658058833 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.8125 100.406767564 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.125 20.6045352989 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.125 5.45110844103 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.214289885937 0.236089414692 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0697339335994 0.076458572812 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0598659327035 0.0737576698707 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107783175945 0.150856017488 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0418789579342 0.0645574589148 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 11.7677419355 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.48 10.9000537634 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.01818996416 113% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 86.8835125448 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.