States the point made in the lecture, and how they cast doubt with the reading.
The reading and the lecture are both about the voting system in the united staste. The author of the reading feels that replacing tradition voting system with computarized voting system can be effecient and accurate. The lecturer challenges the arguments made by the author. He is of the opinion that computarized voting system is more accurate than the traditional voting system.
To begin with, the author argues that there are many chances that candidates choose the wrong people. The article mentions that there are people with some disabilites such as poor eyesight that can lead to a candidate choose the wrong people on ballot due. However, the author says that people who are not used to computer can have hard time voting, and eventually they would vote wrong person. He claims that it would not be fair for people who are not used to computer.
Secondly, the author suggests that because people have to count ballot in large amount it is inevitable that they make mistake. It is stated in that article that people's mistake would have greate effect especially for the people who are somehow equally competing. In contrast, the author refutes this by mentioning that people are the one to create the computer in that human error might be shown in these system, and the result has huge negative effect than tradition voting system.
Finally, the author posits that for computarized voting system can be used to create complex voting system. The computarized can be quick and effective. On the other hand, the author disagree with by stating that computarized system can not effecient since there are used regulary as the banking systems. He says that the computarized can be only used two times a years, and also that when these banking systems started they made error which were collected over time. As a result since we rarely vote we can not rely on computarized voting machine.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-20 | talelaldabous | 60 | view |
| 2021-08-08 | talelaldabous | 65 | view |
| 2021-06-28 | talelaldabous | 73 | view |
| 2021-06-28 | talelaldabous | 60 | view |
| 2021-06-05 | talelaldabous | 68 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statements?Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship between people. 3
- Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship between people. 66
- States the point made in the lecture, and how they cast doubt with the reading. 3
- Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship between people. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 218, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...g system can be effecient and accurate. The lecturer challenges the arguments made ...
^^^
Line 5, column 401, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this system' or 'these systems'?
Suggestion: this system; these systems
...r in that human error might be shown in these system, and the result has huge negative effec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 363, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a year' or simply 'years'?
Suggestion: a year; years
...computarized can be only used two times a years, and also that when these banking syste...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, second, secondly, so, in contrast, such as, as a result, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 12.0772626932 190% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1576.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94043887147 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40267765972 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46394984326 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 506.7 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.1115921186 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.5 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9375 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0625 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0700403955001 0.272083759551 26% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.030550227789 0.0996497079465 31% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.030242251788 0.0662205650399 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0469655892409 0.162205337803 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00929531027985 0.0443174109184 21% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.