The use of mobile phone should be banned in public places like libraries and shops. To what extend do you agree or disagree?
In modern time, telecommunication technology has play a vital role in keeping the abreast of information and bringing people closer. Its usage has become a basic necessity of life and one cannot image to live without mobile phones. From my perspective, I do not find myself in complete agreement, although the use of private technological equipment such as mobile likely cause unwanted disruptions in some certain areas such as libraries, public transports, hospitals and so on, the use of cell phone should be allowed but with some restriction.
On the one hand, in certain places such as hospitals or museums, the utilizing of private phones should be banned as they can cause tons of unexpected distractions or potential harmful. Libraries are considered as ideal sites to assimilate loads of knowledge and actively seek for vital information supporting for studying and even working. Hence, those places where great concentrate is required to ensure adequate comfort environment for everyone. Inevitable sounds from phone notifications are likely to offend and greatly irritating. Especially, noise background directly prevent people keep their focus that lead to unproductive results and operations. This is deemed as a main reason why many libraries in some parts of the word have rules and regulations against people who talk over their cell phones loudly or video-calling on the phone. Furthermore, in hospitals, phones are greatly restricted as they can have adverse impacts on the recovery of patients. It is unlikely that patients want incessant noises of people taking loudly and laughing on their phones. In addition, the usage of mobile phones in those places can interfere with the medical equipment which can harmful to the patients.
On the other hand, restricting utilizing of private phones in public places can keep people away to stay in touch with their own beloved ones in emergency cases and so on. By doing so, it is likely to cause unexpected situations. Moreover, mobile phones, in this day and age, come up with cameras and other services such as email, advance apps, entertainments and so on. This would prevent people to keep away from capturing pictures and saving intriguing moments of events in museum galleries and even important things. Furthermore, during a long journey, smart phones can provide loads of solace to enjoy. Private cell phone can easily switch to silent mode which will not distract others due to loud
ringtones of incoming calls or messages.
In conclusion, my firm conviction is that the ban on smart phones in some places can be justified. However, other places should be allowed but with some restrictions in places.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-06-16 | Minty@1411 | 84 | view |
| 2021-06-16 | Minty@1411 | 73 | view |
- The graph below shows the information about medical care in three Europe countries between 1980 and 2000 78
- The use of social media is replacing face to face interaction among many people in society do you think the advantage outweigh the disadvantages 89
- The graph below show the percentage of men and woman aged 60 64 who were employed in four countries in 1970 and 2000 Summaries the information by selecting and reporting the main features make comparisons where relevant 82
- In the past people stored knowledge in books nowadays people store knowledge on the internet Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
- It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle in order to prevent illness than to spend it on treatment of people who are already ill To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1204, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ment which can harmful to the patients. On the other hand, restricting utilizing...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, so, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 10.4138276553 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 41.998997996 160% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2249.0 1615.20841683 139% => OK
No of words: 431.0 315.596192385 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2180974478 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.20363070211 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84137020078 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 176.041082164 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547563805104 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 714.6 506.74238477 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.8065748771 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.45 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.55 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.3 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229518352072 0.244688304435 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0673890929338 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0591084505637 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125007182506 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0703409371841 0.056905535591 124% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 78.4519038076 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.