The author of the letter claims that skateboarding in Central plaza should be prohibited to improve business conditions. He/She points out that there had been a steady decline in number of shoppers over the previous two years while number of skateboarder increased, also the amount of littering and vandalism has gone up as well. While the authors makes a point that seems somewhat plausible, the argument provided is flawed. The author failed to mention from when skateboarding had been allowed in the shopping mall, if skateboarders are the ones who are littering in the mall and whether skateboarding is the only reason the number of shoppers decreased.
First, the author mentions that over the previous two years the number of shoppers went down while the popularity of skateboarding went up. However, he/she fails to mention that from when skateboarding has been allowed in the plaza. He tries to denote that popularity of skateboarding has decreased the number of shoppers but did not make a direct connection between the timeline of these two events.
Second, the author states that there has been an increase in littering and vandalism throughout the plaza. The underlying assumption is that the skateboarders are the ones who are responsible for it. However, he/she did not provide evidence to make that connection. Shoppers may also be responsible for littering, while some skateboarders may be shoppers themselves. The evidence is not strong enough to make that connection.
Finally, the author claims that owners believe that the number of skateboarders are responsible for the decline in number of shoppers. But, he/she did not say how many owners believed that. Moreover, skateboarders themselves may be the shoppers. There is not enough evidence that proves that every owner had blamed the skateboarders for losing their customers.
In conclusion, based on the points made above, it is safe to say that if the author provided a proper timeline detail of the incidents, provided evidence to make a direct connection between skateboarders and people who littered, and gave a proper estimate of how many shoppers have stopped shopping from the plaza and how many owners believed that skateboarders are the people responsible for their downfall in business, the argument would have been on point. Without these questions answered, the argument is weak to draw such a strong conclusion.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, so, well, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2025.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 385.0 441.139720559 87% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25974025974 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92133785722 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 204.123752495 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.415584415584 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 617.4 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 92.5676929483 57.8364921388 160% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.5 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3888888889 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.16666666667 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2652053519 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0842516747571 0.0743258471296 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059394102796 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156340262091 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0587549749387 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.67 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.