irrefutably, with the advancement of society, the phenomenon of charitable organization has become more prevalent among communities. On that ground, these organizations are involved with noble causes to support poor and needy people. In this regard, some people contend that people should be finalized where their money will be going to spend through charity. On the other hand, there is a group of people who believe that the charitable system should be given the freedom to work in their own ways. Apparently, from my vantage point, the latter point contains more weight. For the following paragraphs, I will delve into the most conspicuous reasons and paragraphs justifying my stance.
The first exquisite point to be mentioned is that although it is totally people’s right about how they want to spare their money, defining and restricting subjects of donations would definitely curb the way how charitable groups work. To be more specific, organizations support many people and help them to deal with their financial pressures by offering them food, clothes, and even medical services. In fact, there are times when one specific requirement might aggravate, and so, the organization wants to fulfill one needs. My own experience could be the best example of what has been elaborated above. When I was volunteering in a charitable trust, most donors wanted to send donations to provide food to hungry ones. Nonetheless, when the winter came, poor people were actually in need of clothes rather than anything else. Unfortunately, the organization could not serve warm clothes since there were restrictions on expenses. Ultimately, despite having money, people did not get what they needed.
Another noteworthy reason is that no one can deny the fact that nowadays there is a lot of fraud happening with people in the name of noble causes, however, there are some trustable charitable corporations working all over the globe through which people showcase their help by donating money. Surprisingly, these charitable groups do not work solely, but they have solid and sophisticated people who actually run the whole process of it. To exemplify, as I mentioned about myself working in the charitable campaign in which there was a statistician who used to gather data on a basis of poor people’s needs. In the later stage, economists analyzed the whole data and drew the conclusion accordingly, while such a complex process is beyond one’s imaginations. Admittedly, once a person finds trust in a charity campaign, they should allow them to work their own way as the decision made by one person is not likely better than the whole campaign can make.
All in all, from contemplating all remarks, in spite of the fact that people might not agree with my viewpoint, I strongly suggest that people should let the organization spend money own their ways. This is because sometimes making restrictive decisions might not be helpful to needy people at right time and because it is hard to make decisions alone about where charitable funds should be allocated.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Irrefutably
irrefutably, with the advancement of society, the p...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s and paragraphs justifying my stance. The first exquisite point to be mentione...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
..., people did not get what they needed. Another noteworthy reason is that no one...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tter than the whole campaign can make. All in all, from contemplating all remar...
^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... charitable funds should be allocated.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, actually, apparently, but, first, however, if, nonetheless, so, while, in fact, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 15.1003584229 166% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.0286738351 163% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 43.0788530466 88% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 52.1666666667 125% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2574.0 1977.66487455 130% => OK
No of words: 497.0 407.700716846 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17907444668 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72159896747 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79848969975 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 212.727598566 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535211267606 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 796.5 618.680645161 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.94265232975 243% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.8535878478 48.9658058833 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.571428571 100.406767564 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.85714285714 5.45110844103 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.214394902093 0.236089414692 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.062956897628 0.076458572812 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0408682816408 0.0737576698707 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136209130221 0.150856017488 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0530725391613 0.0645574589148 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 86.8835125448 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.