In the preceeding argument, both opponents and supporters for the measure proposed by the council of Maple County hold quite plausible concerns, adducing the experience of other towns. However, a closer scrutiny sheds light on a plethora of unanswered questions in the argument, which ought to be resolved before an agreement is made.
To begin with, while the council is worrying about the overdevelopment of the area, no evidence is proffered to show whether this concern is nacessary or not. If Maple County does not face this problem at all, restricting exploitation of farmland in the county would be devastating to the economy. To answer this question, a thorough investigation is needed to evaluate the economic and social conditions of Maple County. Only with concrete facts substantiating the possibility of overdevelopment can the discussion of measures to tackle this problem be meaningful.
What is more, even if the council of Maple County does need to counter overdevelopment, it is still problematic for the proponents and opponents of the proposal to raise the example of other counties. There is no doubt that every county is unique and has its own characteristics, so citing experience of other towns need discretion. In the argument, the author does not offer any information in comparing the three towns mentioned, which undermines the valuation of adducing what had happened in other counties to substantiate people's opinions.
Last but not least, time is also a considerable factor. The supporters and opponents of the proposed measure used examples that happened 10 years and 15 years ago, respectively. Imaginably, the situation has changed a lot during this period. In fact, it even does not make sense to make comparison between Chestnut County and Pine County, not to mention having reference value for Maple County. Therefore, it is imperative for the council to study the alteration of economy in the past one or two decades before using policies enacted previously in predicting the outcomes of new ones.
In sum, while the two sides holding opposing views for the proposed measure both used similar actions taken before in defending their opinions, the argument is rife with holes and questions. Without answering these questions that are crucially important for the judgement of the proposal, the predictions made in the argument that the proposed measure would drive the increase in housing prices in Maple County is unlikely to be valid.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, still, therefore, while, in fact, no doubt, to begin with, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2087.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 397.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25692695214 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97993722868 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546599496222 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 662.4 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7538460021 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.4375 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8125 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1875 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224503112015 0.218282227539 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0673570996025 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0491527795505 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117929919675 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0344666650661 0.0628817314937 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 14.3799401198 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.32208582834 114% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.