The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.
"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
Road safety and reduction of casualties due to automotive accidents has become a paramount task for municipal bodies. On one hand, studies dictate that clamping down on the number of vehicles on the road at a given time, the frequency of road accidents can be brought down. Another school of thought supports the idea of educating drivers and ensuring that driving licenses be granted to citizens with proper driving etiquette. In the previous statement, the author presents the notion of reduction of the number of mopeds on Balmer Island roads to ensure a decline in moped accidents. Though this claim may well have some merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence provided by the author, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The author suggests the town council of Balmer Island to ape the town council of Seaville due to the success in the reduction of accidents in Seaville by throttling the number of mopeds on roads. The distribution of vehicles, as well as drivers, may be very different in these two islands. It is possible that Seaville had a larger number of inexperienced drivers. In such cases, the solution mentioned by the author may suffice. However, no evidence has been provided by the author to suggest that the driving conditions and demographics of both islands are similar. Secondly, the author fails to notice that by limiting the number of rented mopeds per day, the municipal corporation will enforce a first come first serve mechanism. There would not be any way of knowing whether the first 25 drivers renting out the mopeds were immature drivers who are more prone to accidents.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions which further weakens his argument. The author assumes that the mopeds themselves are the cause of road mishaps. However, the author fails to provide proof of the fact that road accidents by other vehicles is negligible and can be ignored. The author wrongly assumes that all drivers are equally skilled and cautious drivers. Alternatively, the town council could place more stringent traffics laws like speed limits, mandatory use of safety equipment, regular documentation of moped servicing and maintenance. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions that remain unproven and failing to provide explication of the links between controlling the number of mopeds on road and accidents caused by them.
While the argument has key issues in the premise and assumptions made by the author, it is not to say that the entire argument is without a base. Primarily, before completely implementing the ban, the author could have done a simulated study in a smaller area. The results of this activity could clearly indicate whether the regulation of mopeds would actually help in reducing accidents. There are several issues with the authors reasoning at present. With research and clarification, he could greatly improve the impact of his argument.
In sum, the author's argument is illogical and based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions which render his conclusion invalid. The author needs to revisit the research and analysis done for Moped users and refine the suggestions proposed by him. If the author truly hopes to change the readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his arguments, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide evidentiary support. Without these, his poorly reasoned argument is unlikely to convince many people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 286, 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.
...rottling the number of mopeds on roads. The distribution of vehicles, as well as dr...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'well', 'while', 'in addition', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.274809160305 0.25644967241 107% => OK
Verbs: 0.151145038168 0.15541462614 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0702290076336 0.0836205057962 84% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0396946564885 0.0520304965353 76% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0274809160305 0.0272364105082 101% => OK
Prepositions: 0.135877862595 0.125424944231 108% => OK
Participles: 0.0534351145038 0.0416121511921 128% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.82156080929 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0229007633588 0.026700313972 86% => OK
Particles: 0.00458015267176 0.001811407834 253% => OK
Determiners: 0.117557251908 0.113004496875 104% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0213740458015 0.0255425247493 84% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00610687022901 0.0127820249294 48% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3683.0 2731.13054187 135% => OK
No of words: 588.0 446.07635468 132% => OK
Chars per words: 6.26360544218 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9242980521 4.57801047555 108% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.438775510204 0.378187486979 116% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.328231292517 0.287650121315 114% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.22619047619 0.208842608468 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.127551020408 0.135150697306 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82156080929 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 286.0 207.018472906 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486394557823 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 59.5497650483 52.1807786196 114% => OK
How many sentences: 29.0 20.039408867 145% => OK
Sentence length: 20.275862069 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5201917482 57.7814097925 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.0 141.986410481 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.275862069 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.448275862069 0.724660767414 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 53.0989913207 51.9672348444 102% => OK
Elegance: 2.12587412587 1.8405768891 116% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.575725777069 0.441005458295 131% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0944896014663 0.135418324435 70% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0463004108764 0.0829849096947 56% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.531983548105 0.58762219726 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.14044572382 0.147661913831 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.238976550336 0.193483328276 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130940290064 0.0970749176394 135% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.576745823331 0.42659136922 135% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0636051045028 0.0774707102158 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.443108093618 0.312017818177 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0894840730038 0.0698173142475 128% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.33743842365 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.87684729064 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 12.0 6.46551724138 186% => OK
Negative topic words: 12.0 5.36822660099 224% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 27.0 14.657635468 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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: This is not the final score. 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.