The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville:
"Over the past three years, there has been a marked increase in cases of 'sidewalk rage,' similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road, but instead among sidewalk walkers. The result is an increase in assaults, property damage, and disruptions of normal pedestrian traffic. In order to address this growing problem, the council must ban cell phone use on sidewalks. Not only do people texting or using their phones slow down pedestrian traffic, but they are also more likely to walk into the road or bump into other walkers. Children are especially vulnerable because they are too short to be easily seen. Middletown passed such a ban and not only have they heard no complaints, but the reported incidents of sidewalk crime has gone down significantly."
This increase in the sidewalk incidents happens due to the irrational anger drivers, and other things lead to the property damage and disruptions of normal pedestrian traffic. After addressing the past three years of data on this problem, the council decides to ban the use of cellphones on sidewalks not just because of the safety of the pedestrians but also brutal cases happen which causes property damage. I partially agree with the idea of the council to reduce cellphone usage during sidewalks. According to the traffic rules, it is very necessary for a pedestrian who is walking on the sidewalks being aware of the traffic around them.
But the one thing, which is very important that is it good from the perspective of the people who need to use their cellphone daily before work during the daily routine journey to their office, It can be very bad for the people who really need to use the phone before work, so there must be a different solution. In my information decrease, the usage of the cellphone is not as necessary as building a traffic boundary for the sidewalks. Yes, it can also work as good as banning the cellphone and I don't think that banning the cellphone is even necessary for that.
Because most of the people, who have work or lots of important things related to the internet, which is only accessible with the help of the phone. What if there is an emergency call coming for someone, but he is not picking it due to the ban or for the unnecessary charge they have to pay for this ban. So, I believe the council should come up with some different plans, for example, building a sidewalk boundary, so there will be no connection between the people on the sidewalk with an angry driver and there must be a guard on every side zebra crossing for controlling the crowd.
In conclusion, I would say Yes, it may have decreased the incidents to some extent, but It can be chaotic as for a person's job life. I prefer the council should come with some different ideas to cop-up with this problem, which lies in the gray area of the solutions and the problem. And nobody has any problem with that.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 619, Rule ID: NOUN_AROUND_IT[1]
Message: Consider using 'the surrounding traffic'?
Suggestion: the surrounding traffic
...walking on the sidewalks being aware of the traffic around them. But the one thing, which is very ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 500, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... as good as banning the cellphone and I dont think that banning the cellphone is eve...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, really, so, as for, as to, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 16.3942115768 18% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1752.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 379.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.62269129288 5.12650576532 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48404240091 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.482849604222 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 705.55239521 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.6450818373 57.8364921388 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.769230769 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.1538461538 23.324526521 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61538461538 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0634664780871 0.218282227539 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0254505574036 0.0743258471296 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0357169102461 0.0701772020484 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0420850034338 0.128457276422 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0462358187455 0.0628817314937 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.11 12.5979740519 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 98.500998004 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.