In recent times, there is an ongoing disputation on overpackaged products, and it inevitably ignited a controversy. Even though multitudinous proponents hold a view that it is the responsibility of consumers alone in avoiding overpackaging of products, I vehemently oppose the view, and I strongly concur that it is the responsibility of both producer as well as the consumer.
Firstly, overpackaging is inextricably linked to promoting the product. Therefore, if consumers avoid the products that delve into promoting, the usage of packaging reduces considerably. Moreover, if consumers prefer products that are based on quality, rather than the looks of the product, producers may try to improve the quality. Thus, it is not only beneficial to the environment, but it is also advantageous to the consumer himself. So, consumers must be vigilant in avoiding products that use overpackaging as a resort to attract buyers.
In addition, producers also must take the environment into consideration while designing the products. Since packaging is primarily decided by the creators, they have the onus in planning it to reduce it as much as possible. Furthermore, producers must look into other means to capture the buyer's attention. For example, they can provide extravagant offers, better advertisement, and improve the quality of the product rather than resort to overpackaging. Thus, both consumers and producers must work in unison to reduce the overpackaging.
To conclude, since overpackaging leads to a myriad of environmental problems including pollution and deforestation, I firmly believe that both producers, as well as consumers, should take responsibility in avoiding the overpackaging. Moreover, the government should also pass regulations to make the transition feasible.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 353, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
... is the responsibility of both producer as well as the consumer. Firstly, overpackaging...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 291, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'buyers'' or 'buyer's'?
Suggestion: buyers'; buyer's
...st look into other means to capture the buyers attention. For example, they can provid...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 155, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
..., I firmly believe that both producers, as well as consumers, should take responsibility i...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, in addition, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 6.10837438424 131% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 5.94088669951 101% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.75862068966 191% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1525.0 1207.87684729 126% => OK
No of words: 269.0 242.827586207 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66914498141 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.46575282268 2.71678728327 128% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 139.433497537 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553903345725 0.580463131201 95% => OK
syllable_count: 488.7 379.143842365 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 1.71428571429 350% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.931034482759 430% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 12.6551724138 111% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.5024630542 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.7234034815 50.4703680194 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.928571429 104.977214359 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2142857143 20.9669160288 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.64285714286 7.25397266985 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 2.91625615764 206% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.327656571416 0.242375264174 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105057931103 0.0925447433944 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0870567063568 0.071462118173 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177854611722 0.151781067708 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.120197519251 0.0609392437508 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 12.6369458128 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 53.1260098522 66% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.9458128079 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 11.5310837438 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.32886699507 116% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 55.0591133005 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.3980295567 92% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.5123152709 95% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.