The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
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
In the letter to editor from Central Plaza store owner mentioned that shoppers in plaza is steadily decreasing and give reason as accreting popularity of skateboarding. They also mentioned that there is dramatic increase in litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. So, they want to ban the skateboarding inside the plaza as it will return business to previous high levels. This argument has merit though he store owner forgets to consider many unaddressed assumption. So, this argument is highly flawed.
First, author mentioned that over past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza steadily decreasing and popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. So, business may be decreasing at a time where there is no skateboard popularity. Therefore, Author can’t blame skateboard’s dramatic popularity for decreased business instead of communicate with other store owners and asking about why do they want to shut their business in central plaza? May be there is a new mall in the city or maintenance charge in central area is much that other areas. So, here author forgets to consider many assumption and direct incriminate skateboard for decreasing business.
After that author mentioned that many other store owners believes the same about skateboard’s effect for their business and claimed that their decreased business is because of more numbers of skateboard users inside the mall even though they failed to provide any evidence about this point as they directly judge cause for their decreased business. But, they have to find out real reason by researching. May be never thought that skateboarding can help in increasing as their business because of orthodox mindset. If you make skateboard riding centre inside plaza then it will help owner to increase popularity of plaza and eventually increasing in customers number in plaza leads towards increasing business.
Next, shop owner mentioned about increase in litter and vandalism caused by skateboarding and this becomes reason for their decreased business. Although, store owners can clean plaza by themselves if case is about befoul plaza and restore their business at old higher levels. They also assumed like only skateboard rider make place dirty and others are not. He has to change their mindset about skateboarding insider the plaza at it does not lead any attrition of business inside plaza. May be it helps as many customer come to the plaza riding skateboard because of its’ popularity.
Lastly letter writer owner wants to prohibit skateboard inside the central plaza and thinks that this rule restore the business to old higher levels. However, viewing increased popularity of skateboard this may result as total alternate because many customer liked to travel on skateboard. If they ban skateboard in central plaza that leads towards negative image in public. Moreover, this results as more decreased business for central plaza’s store owners. So, they can’t ban for the sake of their business.
The argument above is weakens the basis of suggestion given in the letter. Skateboard might help to increase the popularity of mall and skateboard is not the reason for their decreased business so they can’t ban it. So, instead of putting blindly trust on letter and ban the skateboard inside plaza may be more harmful. So, before applying this suggestion, editor has to consider many other points and have to do proper research.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 474, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onsider many unaddressed assumption. So, this argument is highly flawed. First...
^^
Line 3, column 610, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun assumption seems to be countable; consider using: 'many assumptions'.
Suggestion: many assumptions
...as. So, here author forgets to consider many assumption and direct incriminate skateboard for d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 488, Rule ID: MAY_BE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'maybe' (=perhaps)?
Suggestion: Maybe
...any attrition of business inside plaza. May be it helps as many customer come to the p...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 507, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun customer seems to be countable; consider using: 'many customers'.
Suggestion: many customers
...siness inside plaza. May be it helps as many customer come to the plaza riding skateboard bec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 246, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun customer seems to be countable; consider using: 'many customers'.
Suggestion: many customers
...s may result as total alternate because many customer liked to travel on skateboard. If they ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 291, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...customer liked to travel on skateboard. If they ban skateboard in central plaza th...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 28.8173652695 167% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2925.0 2260.96107784 129% => OK
No of words: 546.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35714285714 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78673761949 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.410256410256 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 918.0 705.55239521 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 60.4260806646 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.464285714 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.85714285714 5.70786347227 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.357527382296 0.218282227539 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121482618216 0.0743258471296 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113193289988 0.0701772020484 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2394851035 0.128457276422 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0646448144288 0.0628817314937 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.