In conclusion, although some people are in favour of sharing academic knowledge freely, I strongly believe that the government should enact more suitable policies in order to guarantee the benefit for companies and individuals.
It is an interesting subject of discussion whether or not sharing relative information in various spheres of science, business and academic study become more and more important and enrich collaboration among people. There is a perception that some people advocate the free spreading of valuable knowledge because of its benefit to individuals and society. However, I partly support this point of view, believing that this trend may not create positive effects to people in certain circumstances.
On the one hand, due to the development of the internet, the circulation of information offers a wide range of documentary sources to support users on their study and work. For instance, it is evident that most youngsters who would like to raise their average earnings from self-employment. They have a tendency to consult hands-on experience about setting up and running business effectively from successful businessmen on network sites. In addition, it is not hard to find correlative research on scientific websites from some outstanding authors all over the world, most students can easily seek for instructional lessons and effective methods to apply for their research topic. For these reasons, sharing information and knowledge broadly can bring benefits for most users.
On the other hand, I also believe that plenty of information is still a valuable asset which individuals and companies should safeguard or even need to be charged. For example, in order to fascinate a wide range of consumers, most enterprises have launched marketing strategies on their products, but they still have security information which cannot be shared indiscriminately such as financial resources, customer data, real profits from business activities, and so on. Evidently, most multinational companies do not allow staff to reveal their incomes and bonuses. In addition, there are many language learning websites that require learners to pay a fee on each use. Actually, to create many online vocabulary sets, study methodology, and useful tips to help learners shorten study time, a teacher has to work dedicatedly for hours on end, so it will be unfair if this valuable document is shared freely. Based on the above-mentioned facts, some information should not be shared due to its importance and value.
In conclusion, although some people are in favour of sharing academic knowledge freely, I strongly believe that the government should enact more suitable policies in order to guarantee the benefit for companies and individuals.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-21 | quochung95.ftu2@gmail.com | 84 | view |
- Generally speaking public transport represented the highest percentage of phone usage and family feasts recorded the least phone productivity Additionally elders relied on their phones less than others 84
- A highly controversial issue today relates to whether to supporting the relationship between enterprises and traditions from all over the world or not In this essay I am going to examine this question from both points of view and then give my own opinion 89
- The pie chart displays the changes in the proportion of water consumption and the bar chart illustrates the changes in the percentage of water use in Australia in 2004
- In conclusion although some people are in favour of sharing academic knowledge freely I strongly believe that the government should enact more suitable policies in order to guarantee the benefit for companies and individuals 84
- Introduction The process in which making clothes from recycled plastic bottles are manufactured can be summarised as follows 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 44, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...is an interesting subject of discussion whether or not sharing relative information in various...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, so, still, as to, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2139.0 1615.20841683 132% => OK
No of words: 393.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4427480916 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02191320475 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575063613232 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 506.74238477 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 62.6374399931 49.4020404114 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.6 106.682146367 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2 20.7667163134 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.2 7.06120827912 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.332751260686 0.244688304435 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111469736702 0.084324248473 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.183970631065 0.0667982634062 275% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.291094932757 0.151304729494 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.279374585988 0.056905535591 491% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 13.0946893788 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 50.2224549098 73% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.