In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices, an international organization started issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conserving resources and recycling materials. Companies that receive this certification can attract customers by advertising their products as “ecocertified.” Around the world, many wood companies have adopted new, ecologically friendly practices in order to receive ecocertification. However, it is unlikely that wood companies in the United States will do the same, for several reasons.
First, American consumers are exposed to so much advertising that they would not value or even pay attention to the ecocertification label. Because so many mediocre products are labeled “new” or “improved,” American consumers do not place much trust in advertising claims in general.
Second, ecocertified wood will be more expensive than uncertified wood because in order to earn ecocertification, a wood company must pay to have its business examined by a certification agency. This additional cost gets passed on to consumers. American consumers tend to be strongly motivated by price, and therefore they are likely to choose cheaper uncertified wood products. Accordingly, American wood companies will prefer to keep their prices low rather than obtain ecocertification.
Third, although some people claim that it always makes good business sense for American companies to keep up with the developments in the rest of the world, this argument is not convincing. Pursuing certification would make sense for American wood companies only if they marketed most of their products abroad. But that is not the case—American wood businesses sell most of their products in the United States, catering to a very large customer base that is satisfied with the merchandise.
Both the reading and lecture discuss about the communal online encycopedias, one of contemporary sources where contributors can add new article as well as can make editorial chamges. The former argues that as unlike traditional encycopedias, latest online resources has huge problems, and provides a three issues to support, but latter challenges each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage asserts that communal online encycopedias contributirs are often lack in education, and does not hold any accuracy than traditional experts. However, the professor in the lecture counters that there is none perfect exist in the world. Even a reference either online or offline hold errors, there are not any sources where every article is 100% accurate or right.
Secondly, according to the passage, experts opined that communal online encycopedias gives chance to hackers to hack the crucial information which is not possible in traditional encycopedias. In contrast, the lecture strongly object this idea. She supports her argument by presenting the example of reliable of communal online encycopedias. The format of latest resources cannot be changes which kept the information safely, and there are several editors to monitor the articles frequently, if someone dare to hack also, then editor can change them quickly.
Finally, the passage claims that
Nevertheless, like two suggestions/reasons before, the professor in her/his lecture proclaims that this recommendation is not feasible
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-18 | sonyeoso | 80 | view |
| 2023-03-16 | Ali_Majlesi | 85 | view |
| 2023-02-12 | zaid | 3 | view |
| 2023-02-02 | Rasika0511 | 70 | view |
| 2022-11-17 | Nina Tsarevich | 80 | view |
- Communal online encyclopedias represent one of the latest resources to be found on the Internet They are in many respects like traditional printed encyclopedias collections of articles on various subjects What is specific to these online encyclopedias how 90
- Most culture encourages individuals to sacrifice a large part of their personalities in order to be like other people Thus most people are afraid to think or behave differently because they do not want to be excluded 50
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people Recently however archaeol 65
- Students should memorize the fact only after they have studied the idea trends and concepts that help explain these facts Students who have learned only facts have learned only little 50
- We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 33
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 241, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: ', the latest'.
Suggestion: , the latest
... that as unlike traditional encycopedias, latest online resources has huge problems, and...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 353, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'of the latest'.
Suggestion: of the latest
...ommunal online encycopedias. The format of latest resources cannot be changes which kept ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, well, in contrast, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1282.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 228.0 270.72406181 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.62280701754 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88582923847 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01885681351 2.5805825403 117% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627192982456 0.540411800872 116% => OK
syllable_count: 411.3 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9832325378 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.2 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5 7.06452816374 177% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0167314757713 0.272083759551 6% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00607134179967 0.0996497079465 6% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0134995638019 0.0662205650399 20% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.00757290730916 0.162205337803 5% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0106616092217 0.0443174109184 24% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.3589403974 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.8541721854 60% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.2367328918 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.06 8.42419426049 119% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.7273730684 144% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => 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: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 241, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: ', the latest'.
Suggestion: , the latest
... that as unlike traditional encycopedias, latest online resources has huge problems, and...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 353, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'of the latest'.
Suggestion: of the latest
...ommunal online encycopedias. The format of latest resources cannot be changes which kept ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, well, in contrast, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1282.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 228.0 270.72406181 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.62280701754 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88582923847 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01885681351 2.5805825403 117% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627192982456 0.540411800872 116% => OK
syllable_count: 411.3 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9832325378 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.2 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5 7.06452816374 177% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0167314757713 0.272083759551 6% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00607134179967 0.0996497079465 6% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0134995638019 0.0662205650399 20% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.00757290730916 0.162205337803 5% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0106616092217 0.0443174109184 24% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.3589403974 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.8541721854 60% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.2367328918 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.06 8.42419426049 119% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.7273730684 144% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => 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: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.