Traditional voting systems need to be replaced by computerized voting systems
The reading states that traditional voting systems need to be replaced by computerized voting system and provides three reasons of support. However the lecturer explains that computerized voting may not necessarily improve the accuracy of voting system and he refutes each of the authors’ reason.
First, the reading claims that people may accidentally vote for the wrong candidate in the traditional voting system. The lecturer refutes this claim by saying that people may go wrong in computerized voting systems too and there is a high chance that people who are afraid of technology may not even vote. People with less knowledge about computers can make mistakes in computerized voting systems.
Second, the article postulates that the chance of computers making mistakes in counting ballots are low. However, the professor says that computers are programmed by humans and it cannot be necessarily be free of errors. If the programming is done poorly the counting of the votes can lead to disastrous results.
The passage states that using computers for voting are not any riskier than using it for banking transactions. The lecturer disagrees to the authors claim about lesser risks by stating that voting is held only once or twice a year but transactions are held daily and thus it is easier for programmers to make banking transactions bug free. In the case of elections, programmers do not have much data and experience to correct if any error occurs.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-16 | TiOluwani97 | 87 | view |
| 2023-08-30 | Shimakaze514 | 78 | view |
| 2023-08-30 | Shimakaze514 | 89 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Yash Mehta | 85 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Yash Mehta | 80 | view |
- Traditional voting systems need to be replaced by computerized voting systems 73
- Discuss the advantages of living in a large city versus living in a small town. 60
- There are many different styles of classes at school nowadays. Some students prefer classes where they interact with their teacher and with other students in debates and group assignments. Others prefer classes where they just listen to the teacher speak. 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 141, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... and provides three reasons of support. However the lecturer explains that computerized...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 222, 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.
...annot be necessarily be free of errors. If the programming is done poorly the coun...
^^
Line 13, column 391, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...e of elections, programmers do not have much data and experience to correct if any e...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, second, so, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1245.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 238.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23109243697 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79340674598 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53781512605 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 383.4 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.5395858198 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.181818182 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6363636364 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.18181818182 7.06452816374 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.47722878879 0.272083759551 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1887635267 0.0996497079465 189% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.202177341555 0.0662205650399 305% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.291381848319 0.162205337803 180% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.229090561762 0.0443174109184 517% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.