text:
Floral Patterns

The young man handed a ten dollar bill across the counter, exchanging it for the freshly wrapped flowers the lady gave him.
A lovely bouquet, she said. He smiled, thanked her, and walked out of the market pavilion, exiting onto the downtown side street.

The late afternoon was bright and hot and the dewy flowers glistened optimistically. He headed down the street clutching the bouquet, passing market patrons and other sidewalkers, holding the flowers tightly to avoid them being jostled.

He passed through a crowd gathered at a bus stop, avoiding eye contact where possible. Two shirtless, rudely tattooed men sat reclined against a convenience store looking at him.

Faggot, one muttered, hoping his buddy thought he was overheard, hoping he was not overheard.

Probably.

The young man proceeded down the busy city thoroughfare, passing restaurant patios where glasses clinked and couples laughed. A group of ladies in large sunglasses and large necklaces drinking cocktails ogled him quietly as we walked by. He heard them titter and coo and knew their looks followed him. He would be the subject of their conversation for a few minutes.

He paused at a corner, putting the flowers into the crook of his arm to light a cigarette. A large, Greek-lettered man asked approaching him from across the street.

Yo man, could I bum a dart off you bro? he asked while groping his pocket for a lighter.

Sure.

Thanks bro. Cool flowers dude.

Thanks.

Take ‘er easy man, and he walked off back across the street, leaving the young man to light his own cigarette.

He took a few drags before starting down the street again. It was very warm, and sweat pooled on his back. He decided to cut down a shaded alley and get off the main street. His shoes sounded on the chipped asphalt as he stepped off the sidewalk over a torn garbage bag and into the cool, fetid air of the alley. Old brick rose on both sides and the flaked paint of some decayed mural remained visible beneath the city grime.

The alley exited onto a nearly vacant parking lot, and he crossed the hot pavement towards the street. He flipped his half-smoked cigarette back into the alley to join its numerous kin. The moisture had long since evaporated from the flowers he gripped, and their original lustre had faded.

The street was less busy than the one he had just left and he was thankful. The only person visible was a homeless man sitting on a spread of cardboard sipping from a worn paper cup. The young man considered crossing the street to avoid contact but decided it would be too obvious.

Spare some change?

Sorry, he answered looking away as he walked passed quickly.
I’ll take those flowers instead.

Ha, he stated and didn’t break his pace.

The street exited onto another main road and he took a right onto it, joining the herds of people swarming along the sidewalk and the traffic oozing between intersections. Buskers played on either side, and between the noise of engines and tires and voices, acoustic music was audible there, percussion there, and a wailing street person there.

His mouth was dry and his feet swam in his shoes. There was a Starbucks just ahead and he decided to stop for an ice water.
The line was long, almost to the door, but it was densely air conditioned inside and it cut through the sweaty grit that covered him. He stood as the line slowly progressed forward, the haggard baristas pouring ices and syrups into taxed blenders. He got to the front of the line and ordered his water. The cashier smiled with relief for the brief respite.

Those are beautiful flowers, who’s the lucky g—person? she asked, but he was already moving to the pickup table and her question was ground out in the sound of masticating ice.

He grabbed his water and moved through the crowded café towards the exit. A girl in a short sundress was coming through and he held the door for her with his elbow, hands clutching flowers and water.

Thanks, she said looking up at him, smiling.

You’re welcome, he said, returning her smile.

They paused for a moment, her looking at the flowers in his hand. Her smile dropped and she stepped passed him without another word. The young man exited out of the cool air into the city street.
The sidewalks were filling with nine to fivers finished the grind, inappropriately dressed for the sunny heat. They shoved passed him on both sides headed towards parking lots and bus stops, desperate to get home. He sipped his water and moved slowly upstream against the city.

Despite his best efforts the flowers were getting jostled. A small yellow carnation was crushed down and in, the cellophane folding over it. He stopped at a garbage and discarded his cup and ice, pausing to readjust the crumpled flower, unfolding the plastic from over it.

He crossed the street to cut across the park. Large trees shaded couples sprawled on benches, eating, laughing. He watched as they held hands and touched each other. Teenagers sitting too close, kissing too hard, listening to music too loud. They watched videos on their phones and they sat in each other’s laps. He walked across the grass watching them frankly. No one watched him.

The grass ended and concrete began. His destination was just up the street and he could see the squat grey building sprawled before him. He was a bit later than intended. He wanted another cigarette but didn’t want to smell like smoke.

He got to the parking lot and stopped. Cars were pulling out and he stopped to let them pass. The drivers looked at him. He climbed the steps to the front of the building and stopped. The large doors and a small garbage can with cigarette butts littered around it stood before him. He stood.

Fuck.

He took the decaying bouquet and shoved it into the ashy garbage.

Fuck.

Gripping the door handle he pulled hard and entered the building.

title: Floral Patterns

question: What does the story say about the interaction between the young man and the girl in a short sundress?

answer: The young man is holding a bouquet of flowers. A girl in a short sundress is coming through the door. The young man holds the door for her. The girl smiles at him. They pause for a moment, and then the girl steps past him without saying another word.

critique: The response misses to mention that the girl's smile drops after seeing the flowers.

critique: The answer should mention that the girl's smile drops when she sees the flowers.

critique: It is omitted that the girl's smile dropped when she saw the flowers.

critique: The girl's reaction to the flowers is omitted.

critique: It's omitted that the girl smiles at the young man but then her smile drops after looking at the flowers.

critique: The girl's smile drops when she sees the flowers.

critique: The answer should mention the girl's reaction to the flowers.

question: What does the story say about the young man's interaction with the Greek-lettered man?

answer: The young man was walking down a busy city street with a bouquet of flowers. A Greek-lettered man asked him if he could bum a dart off him. The young man said yes. The man then left him to light his own cigarette.

critique: The answer omits the end of the interaction.

critique: The response misses to mention that the young man was not interested in interacting with the Greek-lettered man.

critique: The answer omits that, as the man left, he asked for the flower.

critique: The response misses to mention that the young man was walking down a busy city street with a bouquet of flowers. A Greek-lettered man asked him if he could bum a dart off him. The young man said yes. The man then left him to light his own cigarette.

critique: The answer omits the young man's interaction with the Greek-lettered man.

critique: The response does not cover the interaction with the Greek-lettered man.

critique: The response is missing the part where the young man was walking down the street with a bouquet of flowers.

text: The answer could mention that the Greek-lettered man compliments the flowers.

question: What does the story say about what the young man did upon arriving at his destination?

answer: No answer

critique: The answer should mention the young man's destination.

critique: The response misses to mention that upon arriving at his destination, the young man shoved the bouquet into the ashtray.

critique: The answer should mention that he throws the flowers away.

critique: The answer can mention that despite his efforts, some of the flowers were destroyed on the way.

question: What does the story say about the identity of the person who was supposed to receive the flowers?

answer: No answer

critique: The identity of the recipient is not mentioned


split: train

text:
It was 1:30am after a grueling Day 3 on the Inca trail. I haven't pooped since day 1. I had hoped to hold it until we returned to the hotel the following night.  But I knew when I crawled into my bag that this night might have other plans.  It was such a strange mixture of feelings.  On the one hand, there was almost an inevitability that pooping would happen this night.  I was afraid if I stayed in the tent there might be an extremely embarrassing situation. On the other hand, I was freezing and I didn't want to leave the tent.  I didn't want to wake up my travel companion.  I was afraid that the poop might be a messy affair, and just maybe I could hold it for another day.

After hours of tossing and turning, I decided I must get up.  I put my freezing FiveFingers on my already freezing feet.  Upon exiting the tent, I'm greeted by the most haunting, beautiful gift of a vista.  It was a clear night, the first since we had started hiking.  Machu Picchu Mountain was visible bathed in silvery moonlight.  In the distance were the snow capped peaks of the Andes, also reflecting the brilliance of June's supermoon.   I saw constellations I've always read about but never seen: the Crab, Pegasus and his Great Square--even Orion was here!  I didn't expect to see him in the Southern Hemisphere!  The Big Dipper, low on the horizon and upside down, pointing towards home.  And Cruz, the beautiful Southern Cross.  CSN kept repeating in my head--"When you see the Southern Cross for the first time.  You understand now why you came this way.  The truth that you've been running from is so small, but it's as big as the promise, the promise of a coming day!"  The truth is that I'm a worthwhile person.

I could've stood mesmerized there for hours, except that I had a job to do, a biological imperative.

I walked up a lonely trail to the restroom.  My experience with the free restrooms on the trail was that they were nasty.  This one proved to be no exception.  I open the door and look in.  There's shit all over the floor, but it doesn't matter.  This is my destiny.  There's no toilet, just a porcelain hole in the ground.  I drop trou, being as careful as I can not to let my hiking pants touch the turdy tile floor.  I squat slightly, with no idea what's going to happen.  I'm afraid it's going to be a drawn out watery affair, and I will have to stay in this tiring squatting position a long time while my insides flush out.   I'm afraid I might slip on the floor, damp with piss and excrement.  I'm afraid I might miss the hole and make the room even more unsanitary.  Was I standing in exactly the right position?

It was the moment of truth.  In less than a minute, there was a solid compact mass of well-formed shit.  It felt like a beautiful black birth.  I knew in an instant that that was going to be all, and it was enough.  It seemed to fall towards the porcelain hole for an eternity.  And…

Bullseye.

My job done, I wipe (though I hardly had to).  I open the door and walk to the hand washing station.  When I'm done, I turn to revel in the light of the moon, the stars, and the promise of a coming day.

title: Pooping On The Inca Trail [500 words, OC]

question: Describe the restroom the narrator used.

answer: The restroom was a porcelain hole in the ground. It was covered in feces and urine.

critique: The answer could be more specific about the restroom's location.

critique: The answer could be phrased as a complete sentence.

critique: The story does not mention urine at all, so this should be omitted.

critique: "It was covered in feces and urine." - is inaccurate. There was only feces on the floor, not urine.

critique: The answer should mention that there was no toilet.

critique: There was no mention of urine in the passage.

critique: The answer should mention that the restroom was a free one on the Inca trail.

question: Describe the author's plan for the next day.

answer: No answer

critique: The passage does not mention the author's plan for the next day.

question: Summarize the source of the author's dilemma.

answer: He has been hiking for three days without relieving himself. He is afraid to exit the tent and expose himself to the elements. He is also afraid the poop will be a mess, so he tries to postpone relief.

critique: The answer should mention that the author is also afraid to wake up his travel companion.

question: Describe the view the author saw once she got out of the tent.

answer: The author saw a beautiful vista of Machu Picchu Mountain bathed in silvery moonlight. In the distance were the snow-capped peaks of the Andes, also reflecting the brilliance of June's supermoon. The author saw constellations she had always read about but never seen: the Crab, Pegasus, and his Great Square, Orion, the Big Dipper, and Cruz.

critique: The answer should mention the author's emotional reaction to the view.

critique: The answer should mention the free restrooms.


text:
JAYMAR JOHNSON (born July 10, 1984) is a former American football wide receiver. He was drafted by the Minnesota Vikings in the sixth round of the 2008 NFL Draft. He played college football at Jackson State.

Johnson has also played for the Arizona Cardinals.

Early years

Johnson was born on July 10, 1984, in Gary, Indiana. As a kid, he won seven Pop Warner trophies and his nickname was “Double-J”.[1]

As a senior in high school he was named All-State, All-Area and All-Conference.[2]

Shootings

As a teenager, Johnson left his aunt's home in Gary with his nephew (William M. Fields Jr.) and was caught in the crossfire of a gun battle about 100 yards from his location.[3][4]

A few years later during a pickup basketball game, Johnson fled with his cousins and later discovered his t-shirt had been grazed by a bullet.[5][6]

College career

Johnson attended Jackson State University and debuted for the Tigers against Alabama State and future teammate Tarvaris Jackson.[7] As a junior, he had a career-high 199 receiving yards against Southern.[8] During his last three seasons at Jackson State, Johnson started in every game.[9] He majored in health education at Jackson State.[10]

Professional career

Minnesota Vikings

Johnson was drafted by the Minnesota Vikings in the sixth round of the 2008 NFL Draft, through a pick acquired from trading Troy Williamson to the Jacksonville Jaguars. He became the first Jackson State player to be drafted since Sylvester Morris in the 2000 NFL Draft.[11] He was cut late during training camp but was re-signed to the practice squad on September 1, 2008. He spent most of the year on the practice squad.[12] According to Vikings head coach Brad Childress, during the 2009 offseason, Johnson put on 17 pounds getting up to 187 and is currently the hardest worker on the team.[13]

During the 2010 preseason, Johnson was placed on the Injured Reserve list, having broken his left thumb in the Week 1 preseason game against the St. Louis Rams. The injury allowed the Vikings to re-register returning quarterback Brett Favre to their 53-man roster.[14]

On September 2, 2011, he was waived by Minnesota.

Arizona Cardinals

The Arizona Cardinals signed him to their practice squad on September 20. He was promoted to the active roster on November 29. Johnson was waived on December 23, 2011. Johnson was added to the practice squad on December 28, 2011. He was waived on August 25, 2012.

Winnipeg Blue Bombers

Johnson signed with the Winnipeg Blue Bombers of the Canadian Football League in April 2014.[15] Johnson was released from the team on June 20, 2014.[16]

Personal

His brother James played college football at Arkansas-Pine Bluff.[17] He is the youngest of eight children[18] and enjoys playing the saxophone[19] and planned on joining the medical field following his college career.[20] His wife (Kassy Johnson) is a special needs teacher at Eden Prairie High School in Minneapolis, Minnesota.[21]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15] http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:n76r361nl_8J:www.cjob.com/2014/04/22/bombers-add-2subtract-1/+&cd=19&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

[16] https://www.bluebombers.com/2014/06/20/bombers-announce-final-roster/

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

title: Jaymar Johnson

question: What does the article say about Johnson's career?

answer: Johnson was drafted into the Vikings, where he spent most of his time on the practice squad but was re-signed. He spent a year on the Injured Reserve after jerking his thumb. He was then waived by the Vikings three years later and signed on to the Arizona Cardinals practice squad, getting promoted to the active roster after nine months, where he spent a further nine months before being waived yet again. He then signed on to a Canadian football team, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.

critique: Doesn't mention getting cut by Vikings in 2011.

critique: Johnson's year on Injured Reserve was in 2010.

critique: The answer should mention that Johnson was signed to the Blue Bombers for a year and released.

critique: Jaymar Johnson played for the Arizona Cardinals in 2011. He was not with the Vikings in 2011.

critique: The article never states why Johnson was waived by Minnesota.

critique: The answer omits Johnson's college career.

critique: The answer is inaccurate and needs to be re-written.

critique: The Vikings drafted Johnson in 2008, not 2009.

critique: The answer should mention Johnson's college career.

critique: Rather than simply listing each of the teams, the answer should detail Johnson's positions with each team.

critique: The answer should mention the shootings.

critique: There is no evidence that Johnson spent a year on the Injured Reserve after jerking his thumb.

critique: The response includes some information not useful for the task.

text: The durations in the answer about Johnson's stay with the Arizona Cardinals are wrong. Johnson got drafted on September 20, 2011, promoted to the active roster on November 29, and was waived on December 28.

category: accuracy

refinement: Johnson was drafted into the Vikings, where he spent most of his time on the practice squad but was re-signed. He spent a year on the Injured Reserve after jerking his thumb. He was then waived by the Vikings three years later and signed on to the Arizona Cardinals practice squad, getting promoted to the active roster after nine months, where he spent a further nine months before being waived yet again. He then signed on to a Canadian football team, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.

question: What does the article say about Johnson's MVP performance?

answer: No answer

critique: There is no mention of Johnson's MVP performance.

critique: There is no MVP performance mentioned in the article.

critique: There is no information in the article about Johnson's MVP performance.

critique: No answer is given, but the article does not mention anything about his MVP performance.

critique: There is no information about Johnson's MVP performance in the article

critique: No answer is given, but the article does not mention anything about Johnson's MVP performance.

critique: There is no mention of Johnson's MVP performance in the article.


text:
NELSON “NEL” TARLETON (14 February 1906[1] – 12 January 1956) was an English featherweight boxer from Liverpool, England. He was British featherweight champion on three separate occasions and was one of only seven fighters to win two or more Lonsdale Belts outright.

Boxing style

Tarleton lacked a punch, but was immensely skilful, winning most of his important fights on points. He was tall and very thin. He had only one lung from the age of two, but was still able to box successfully until he was 42.

Professional career

Born in Liverpool, Tarleton had his first professional fight on 14 January 1926 (his twentieth birthday), when he beat George Sankey on points over ten rounds at Liverpool Stadium.[2]

He built up an impressive domestic record, with only the occasional defeat, fighting most of his bouts in his hometown of Liverpool. Then, in October 1929, he went to the United States and had a number of fights in various venues in New York City, scoring five wins, two losses, and one draw.

British featherweight title

His next fight, in November 1930, was a title challenge against the British featherweight champion, Johnny Cuthbert. The pair fought a fifteen-round draw in Liverpool Stadium. In October 1931, the pair had a rematch at Anfield Football Ground, and this time Tarleton won on points.[3]

In November 1932, he defended his British title against Tommy Watson, in Liverpool Stadium, and lost on points.[4]

Title regained

In July 1934, Tarleton had a re-match with Watson, at Anfield, and regained his title with another points win.[5]

In September 1934, Tarleton fought for the world featherweight title against American fighter, Freddie Miller. The fight was held in Liverpool, and Miller won on points to retain his featherweight title.[6]

In December 1934, Tarleton defended his title against Dave Crowley at the Empire Pool, Wembley, winning on points, and also winning the Lonsdale Belt outright.[7]

In June 1935, Tarleton fought Freddie Miller again for his world featherweight title. The fight, as before, was held in Liverpool, and Miller won on points again, to retain his title.[8]

In May 1936, he defended his British title against Johnny King of Manchester, defeating him on points.

In September 1936, he defended his title again, against Johnny McGrory. The fight was held at Anfield, and Mcgrory won on points to take Tarleton’s title.[9]

Third title

In February 1940, Tarleton fought for the British featherweight title again. The fight was against holder Johnny Cusick and was also for the Commonwealth title. Tarleton won on points at Liverpool Stadium to take the British title for the third time.[10]

In November 1940, he defended his British and Commonwealth titles at Liverpool Stadium, against Tom Smith of Sunderland, winning on points.[11]

Tarleton continued fighting, until February 1945, when he defended his British and Commonwealth featherweight titles against Al Phillips, at Belle Vue, Manchester. At the age of 39, he won on points against his 25-year-old opponent, and retained his titles.[12]

Tarleton did not defend his titles again but relinquished them in February 1947, at the age of 41.

After retiring, Tarleton struggled with ill health and died at the age of 49. He left a wife Barbara, and a twin boy and girl.

[1] Odd, Gilbert E. (ed.) (1946) _Boxing News Annual 1946_, War Facts Press, p. 53

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

title: Nel Tarleton

question: What does the article say about Tarleton's matchups against heavyweights?

answer: No answer

critique: The answer can't be found in the article.

critique: The article does not mention any matchups against heavyweights.

critique: The article doesn't mention any matchups against heavyweights.

critique: The article does not mention anything about matchups against heavyweights.

critique: The article does not mention anything about Tarleton's matchups against heavyweights.

question: What does the article say about Tarleton's title-defending performances?

answer: He defended his title against Tommy Watson in 1932. Tarleton won the rematch in 1934, regaining his title. He also won the Lonsdale belt outright. He defended his title against Dave Crowley in 1934, once again retaining his title. He defended his title against Johnny King in 1935, winning it on points. He lost his title when he defended it against Johnny McGrory. He fought for the title a third time in 1940 and won the bout, becoming champion for the third time. After he defended his title against Al Phillips in 1945, he relinquished the title in 1947.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: "He defended his title against Tommy Watson in 1932. Tarleton won the rematch in 1934, regaining his title. He also won the Lonsdale belt outright. He defended his title against Dave Crowley in 1934, once again retaining his title. He defended his title against Johnny King in 1935, winning it on points. He lost his title when he defended it against Johnny McGrory. He fought for the title a third time in 1940 and won the bout, becoming champion for the third time. After he defended his title against Al Phillips in 1945, he relinquished the title in 1947." - this is irrelevant and should be removed.

critique: The response could use clearer language.

critique: He defended his title against Tommy Watson in 1932. Tarleton won the rematch in 1934, regaining his title. He also won the Lonsdale belt outright. He defended his title against Dave Crowley in 1934, once again retaining his title. He defended his title against Johnny King in 1935, winning it on points. He lost his title when he defended it against Johnny McGrory. He fought for the title a third time in 1940 and won the bout, becoming champion for the third time. After he defended his title against Al Phillips in 1945, he relinquished the title in 1947.

critique: "against Al Phillips in 1945" - is incorrect. Tarleton defended his titles against Al Phillips in 1945.

text: The answer states that Tarleton defended his title against King in 1935, but it was in 1936.

question: What does the article say about Tarleton's extraordinary feats?

answer: Tarleton was one of only seven fighters to win two or more Lonsdale Belts outright. He was British featherweight champion on three separate occasions. He won his first professional fight on his twentieth birthday, beating George Sankey on points over ten rounds at Liverpool Stadium. He built up an impressive domestic record, with only the occasional defeat, fighting most of his bouts in his hometown of Liverpool. In October 1929, he went to the United States and had a number of fights in various venues in New York City, scoring five wins, two losses, and one draw. He won the British featherweight title in November 1930 against Johnny Cuthbert, who he fought to a draw in their first match. In September 1936, he defended his title again and lost it to Johnny McGrory. In February 1940, he fought for the British featherweight title again and won it for the third time.

critique: The response lists many of Tarleton's achievements and not his feats.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The details about his bouts in New York and his fights against McGrory, for example, cover multiple sentences and therefore would be more suitable for a full standalone sentence to accurately reflect his achievements.

critique: The response is missing the date when Tarleton won his first professional fight.

text: Tarleton's most extraordinary feat is that he had a single lung from age 2 and managed to fight exceptionally well despite that.

category: coverage

question: What does the article say about Tarleton's title-challenging fights?

answer: Tarleton had his first professional fight against George Sankey and won on points. His next fight was a title challenge against the British featherweight champion, Johnny Cuthbert. The pair fought a 15-round draw in Liverpool Stadium. In October 1931, Tarleton won the British title against Cuthbert in Liverpool Stadium. In November 1932, he defended his British title against Tommy Watson and lost on points. In July 1934, Tarleton had a re-match with Watson and won the title on points. In September 1934, he fought for the world featherweight title against American fighter, Freddie Miller, and lost on points. In December 1934, he defended his title against Dave Crowley and also won the Lonsdale Belt outright. In June 1935, he fought Freddie Miller again and lost on points. In May 1936, he defended his British title against Johnny King of Manchester and won on points. In September 1936, he defended his title again against Johnny McGrory and lost on points. In February 1940, he fought for the British and Commonwealth titles against Johnny Cusick and won on points. In November 1940, he defended his title against Tom Smith of Sunderland, winning on points.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The answer is a massive run-on sentence that is difficult to read.

critique: It is omitted that he won the British title three other times, in February 1940, November 1940, and 1945.

text: The answer mentions most of Tarleton's fights even though the question asks only for the fights where Tarleton challenged for a title.

category: coherence


text:
“The court recognizes that all your papers were submitted on time and all the forms were completed in full, and while I personally acknowledge your proposal was well-written and you gave an abundance of credible evidence and reputable sources to support your argument, it is the opinion of this court that your argument just isn't sufficient enough to validate the reasons to grant your request. And thus the court denies your request to commit suicide.”

“But your honor! What about section five that states the government acknowledges the philosophies behind the 'social contract' and thus if I am to reject such contract it is well within my right -”

“Sorry, unfortunately the court does not recognize that argument as valid. The spirit of the philosophy of the social contract is not so you can reject all of society and kill yourself. The social contract is something you take part of by being alive.”

“BUT I DON'T WANT TO BE ALIVE!”

“Unfortunately, sir, you must abide my the laws of this nation, just like everyone else. Feel free to start a petition or what not. All such rules can be found in the social contract. But our ruling stays. You are sentenced to a long and hopefully fruitful life.”

It's midday and the morning rain continued its steadily pouring a light drizzle. The city streets are wet and shiny, the lights reflecting off the water. With the rain comes the cold and an ominous feeling. It is the feeling that it could rain harder, a thunderstorm could come. It is the feeling the roads being slicker could cause more accidents. Its the feeling of autumn turning into winter. It is a feeling of change hanging in the air.

Raphael Orefice stares out the window at the passing traffic longingly. Many of the cars barrel through the intersection, splashing water as they go. The roads are to slick, there's no way they'd be able to stop in time.

“Cheer up Ralph. So your day in court didn't go as you planned.”

“It's Raph. Raphael. No ell.”

“Oh sorry, Raphael.”

“It's no problem. Can I get a refill?”

Brennan came back with the coffee and filled his mug. “So what's your plans now?”

“I don't know Brendan. I guess I gotta check the papers. Look up job postings. I guess if I gotta be alive I better get a job so I can keep on living. It feels like we spend the majority of our lives working. Big fucking waste.”

“Come on, Raff. It ain't that bad. I mean, in actuality, assuming you have a forty hour a week job, you spend just as much time at home, more if you include sleep. And then there are always the weekends. So you literally aren't spending the majority of your life working. Most of your hours are for you. And even work isn't too bad if you make friends. Like talking to you is making my job a whole lot easier.”

“Thanks Brendan. I appreciate the sentiment. Plus, technically, you're right. So I can't argue.”

“You should try to see what the government is offering. Government jobs are very good in terms of both pay and retirement. You might want to consider it.”

“Yeah, I guess I might look into it.”

“And Raph?”

“Yeah?”

“It's Brennan. Two 'n's, no 'd.'”

Raphael slowly sipped his coffee watching the cars outside splash around in the streets. It seemed very precarious to him. He felt that lingering gloom. He felt dread. He saw a young woman, bundled up with a chic umbrella waiting at the crosswalk. A big city bus was coming down the street towards the intersection. Raphael imagined the woman haphazardly stepping into the street, unaware of the city bus. He imagined running out of the cafe, darting towards the woman. Maybe she would be in the middle of the street as the city bus came. It would slam the brakes but the streets would be too slick. It couldn't stop. Raphael would dash out into the streets and push the woman to safety, out of the path of the bus. The bus would then plow into him. He would be mangled. Broken limbs, broken ribs. Fractured skull. But he could survive it. He'd be in a hospital bed. And the woman? She'd land in the middle of the street. What if a car was coming?

Raphael shook himself from his dumb day dream. He laughed to himself. Took a sip of coffee. Looked at Brennan who was chatting to another customer and looked back at the woman at the crosswalk. Maybe she would be fine in the middle of the street. No cars were coming. She could get up and go to safety. Maybe she would visit him in the hospital. Bring him flowers. Be real thankful. She looked attractive. Young and attractive. A heavy sigh and Raphael looked away, up to at the gray sky. He imagined life on a moon colony. Maybe that would be different. Maybe he just needs more regulations. Life in a moon colony, everyone has a job, everyone has a set schedule, he imagined. It's like clockwork; everything has its place. Life on Earth? It's like a bunch of rats running around just trying to figure out the easiest way to get a slice of cheese. There is a semblance of order, but there is decay. The homeless on the streets proved that to him. He could be a vagabond. He could be a vagrant. There is room to be listless, to be without purpose on Earth. There is no set path. It is freedom, but freedom is chaos. There are no homeless people on the moon. Maybe they are lonely, maybe they have regrets, but they sure as hell have a place and purpose.

Raphael thought he heard some distant thunder and looked back at the streets.. The woman was no longer at the crosswalk. Cars stopped at the traffic signal were given the green and started up, approaching in waves. With the rain, the traffic lights reflected in bleary streaks, the whole scene seemed like one big watercolor. An urban gray watercolor of traffic lights. Mechanical yet expressionistic.

title: Earth Base, 2099

question: Summarize the relationship between Raphael and Brennan?

answer: Raphael and Brennan are friends. Brennan works at the cafe where Raphael is sitting. Brennan tries to cheer up Raphael after he is denied his request to commit suicide.

text: It's not immediately clear that Raphael and Brennan are friends to begin with; they don't get each other's names correct to begin with.

question: What does the story say about Raphael's desires?

answer: Raphael wants to commit suicide. He thinks life on Earth is a waste of time. He wants to be a vagabond or a vagrant. He wants to be free from the social contract. He wants to be a homeless person. He wants to live on the moon.

critique: The answer should mention that Raphael wants to be free of the social contract so he can commit suicide.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The answer should mention that Raphael wants to be free from the social contract because he doesn't want to be alive.

critique: The answer should mention that Raphael wants to be free from the social contract so he can commit suicide.

critique: The response is missing some of the desires that Raphael has.

critique: 'He wants to be a vagabond or a vagrant. He wants to be free from the social contract. He wants to be a homeless person.' are not stated.

critique: The desire to live on the moon is not explicitly mentioned.

critique:
- Commit suicide: the reason why Raphael wanted to commit suicide is not explained, this means that the sentence is a bit misleading.
- 'life on Earth is a waste of time': the correctness of this sentence is questionable. According to Raphael, life on Earth might seem like a waste of time, but there is no specific waste of life he was sure of. However, he said he wished to be free from the social contract.
-'He wants to be a vagabond or a vagrant.': The correctness of this sentence is also questionable, this should be shown because according to the rules of the social contract, there is no place for him to be so. The option of being someone on the moon, with a set purpose, is also not guaranteed. This sentence, at the least, discourages from being inducted into the social contractor.
- Lifelessness, listlessness, and being without purpose: The story does not explain being listless, but the options of being a vagabond or a vagrant are not prescribed by the social contract, that is why Raphael want to reject the contract.
- Homeless people on the moon: Although it is correct that there are no homeless people on the moon, Raphael never said he wanted to live there.

text: Much of the answer is incorrect - it's not so much that Raphael wants to be a vagabond, homeless, or live on the moon as such; rather he hopes to escape from what he perceives to be a mundane and meaningless existence on Earth and the prospect of spending most of his life working.

question: What does the story say about jobs?

answer: Nicholas Orefice's lawyer and acquaintance, Brennan, talks about government jobs being high on pay and retirement. He reasons that it is a very good idea for Orefice to consider working for the government. Orefice is not sure about this though because for him work means hours and hours of laborious, unnecessary work. Unemployment and homelessness are the main factors that have been eating away at the states of economies of the world and causing more global unrest. Raph is a little unsure of what he thinks about work since he will be living at least 40 hours a week and his thoughts are taking him into another direction.

critique: The answer includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The second part of the response is not accurate or relevant to the question. It is not well-written or clear, and is therefore unhelpful in responding to the question of how we are meant to understand the story's approach to jobs.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The response is inaccurate and does not address the question.

critique: The last two sentences are irrelevant to the question.

critique: This is not stated in the story and should be omitted.

critique: The response contains inaccurate information.

text: Raphael feels like spending most of his life working is a waste of time, and wonders if life on the moon might be more regulated and fulfilling. Brennan, while trying to cheer Raphael up, states that jobs are usually 40 hours a week and so do not consume the majority of one's life, and that work is not so bad with work friends. Much of the answer doesn't convey this clearlly or accurately.

question: Summarize everything relating to Raphael's mother.

answer: No answer

critique: There is no mention of a mother in the story.

critique: The answer should mention that Raphael's mother is dead.


text:
GEORGE FREDERICK CHARLES, MARGRAVE OF BRANDENBURG-BAYREUTH (19 June 1688 at Obersulzbürg Castle, near Mühlhausen – 17 May 1735 in Bayreuth), was a German prince, member of the House of Hohenzollern, nominal Margrave of Brandenburg-Bayreuth-Kulmbach (1708–35) and Margrave of Brandenburg-Bayreuth (1726–35).

Family

He was the eldest of the fourteen children born to Margrave Christian Heinrich of Brandenburg-Bayreuth-Kulmbach by his wife, Countess Sophie Christiane of Wolfstein. Besides him, only six of his siblings survived childhood: Albrecht Wolfgang, killed in battle in 1734; Dorothea Charlotte, Countess of Hohenlohe-Weikersheim, who died in 1712 after only seven months of marriage; Sophie Magdalene, Queen of Denmark; Frederick Ernst; Sophie Caroline, Princess of Ostfriesland; and Frederick Christian, who later inherited the margraviate of Bayreuth.

Life

During his early years, George Frederick Charles was instructed by his very religious mother, and later received a careful formal education in Bielefeld. From 1700 to 1704 he travelled to western Europe as part of a traditional educational journey (Grand Tour), and visited, among other countries, Denmark, France and the Dutch Republic. Later, he studied four years at the University of Utrecht. After the death of his father in 1708 he returned with his family, who had lived since 1704 in the Schloss Weferlingen near Magdeburg, and assumed the nominal title of _Margrave of Brandenburg-Bayreuth-Kulmbach_.

Schloss Weferlingen had been assigned to his family as an appanage by King Frederick I of Prussia, after George Frederick Charles's heavily indebted father had renounced his succession rights to the Franconian Hohenzollern estates of Bayreuth and Ansbach in favour of Prussia in the Contract of Schönberg. George Frederick Charles nonetheless tried to recover his rights after the death of his father and sought the abolition of this contract. He was able to secure the support of the Franconian states, who feared being merged into the Franconian Circle by Prussia. George Frederick Charles could also rely on the decisive assistance of the Archbishop of Mainz and Prince-Bishop of Bamberger Lothar Franz von Schönborn and his nephew, the Imperial Vice-Chancellor (German: _Reichsvizekanzler_) Frederick Karl von Schönborn, who supported the abolition of the Contract of Schönberg. His efforts finally succeeded only in 1722 after long and difficult discussions and the payment of a substantial indemnity to Prussia.

When the Margrave Georg Wilhelm died in 1726 without surviving male issue, George Frederick Charles assumed the principality of Bayreuth without further difficulties.

After his accession, George Frederick Charles put great value on the improvement of the ruined finances of his territories and made local government his highest priority. In contrast to many of his contemporary rulers, he had no political or military ambitions. Instead he was very pious and intensely supported August Hermann Francke in inculcating the importance of religious life for his subjects. He was remarkable for his support of orphanages.

He was uninterested in court life, and in his last years built up Schloss Himmelkron, a former monastery, probably with plans to retire there.

In the memoirs of his daughter-in-law Wilhelmine of Prussia, George Frederick Charles is described as a thin, bandy-legged, egotistical, wrong-headed, jealous person. The antipathy was mutual. The margrave harassed his daughter-in-law in much the same way that her parents had done. When Wilhelmine gave birth to a daughter, it destroyed George Frederick Karl's hopes to take charge of his grandchild's upbringing, since he was allowed to supervise the education of his son Frederick's child only if it were a boy, according to the marriage contract signed with Wilhelmine. Frederick supported his wife and the drunk margrave hit him with his stick without injuring him.

Marriage and issue

In Reinfeld on 17 April 1709 George Frederick Charles married Dorothea of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Beck. They had five children:

1.  Sophie Christiane Luise (b. Weferlingen, 4 January 1710 – d. Brussels, 13 June 1739), married on 11 April 1731 to Alexander Ferdinand, 3rd Prince of Thurn and Taxis.
2.  Frederick (b. Weferlingen, 10 May 1711 – d. Bayreuth, 26 February 1763), successor of his father as Margrave of Bayreuth.
3.  Wilhelm Ernst (b. Weferlingen, 26 July 1712 – d. Mantua, 7 November 1733).
4.  Sophie Charlotte Albertine (b. Weferlingen, 27 July 1713 – d. Ilmenau, 2 March 1747), married on 7 April 1734 to Duke Ernst August I of Saxe-Weimar.
5.  Sophie Wilhelmine (b. Weferlingen, 8 July 1714 – d. Aurich, 7 September 1749), married on 25 May 1734 to Prince Charles Edzard of East Frisia.

After seven years of unhappy marriage, George Frederick Charles and Dorothea separated in 1716. Eight years later (1724), their marriage was formally dissolved. Dorothea later emigrated to Sweden, where she died in 1761, twenty years after her former husband. Neither of them remarried.

Ancestry

title: George Frederick Charles, Margrave of Brandenburg-Bayreuth

question: Summarize everything relating to the deaths of Charles's family members.

answer: His father died in 1708. His sister Dorothea Charlotte died in 1712. His sister Sophie Caroline died in 1747. His sister Sophie Wilhelmine died in 1749. His son Frederick died in 1763. His wife Dorothea died in 1761.

critique: The answer should mention that his brother Albrecht Wolfgang died in 1734.

critique: It is not stated that his sister Dorothea Charlotte died in 1712.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The text does not explicitly say that one of Charles's sisters died in 1747. Also, one of his sisters is said to have died in 1749.

text: Sophie Wilhelmine was his daughter, not his sister

question: What does the article say about the type of person George Frederick Charles was?

answer: He was a German prince, member of the House of Hohenzollern, and nominal Margrave of Brandenburg-Bayreuth-Kulmbach and Margrave of Brandenburg-Bayreuth. He was the eldest of fourteen children born to Margrave Christian Heinrich of Brandenburg-Bayreuth-Kulmbach by his wife, Countess Sophie Christiane of Wolfstein. He was a very religious person and intensely supported August Hermann Francke in inculcating the importance of religious life for his subjects. He was remarkable for his support of orphanages. He was uninterested in court life, and in his last years built up Schloss Himmelkron, a former monastery, probably with plans to retire there. He was described as a thin, bandy-legged, egotistical, wrong-headed, jealous person. The antipathy was mutual. The margrave harassed his daughter-in-law in much the same way that her parents had done.

critique: The answer is about his family and his life, not about his personality.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The answer is too long and should be rewritten.

critique: The answer should mention that he was a thin, bandy-legged, egotistical, wrong-headed, jealous person.

text: "He was described as a thin, bandy-legged, egotistical, wrong-headed, jealous person" by his daughter-in-law

question: What does the article say about Charles's life during the first decade of the 1700s?

answer: In 1700 to 1704, he went to western Europe to study, an educational journey called the Grand Tour. He started his journey in Denmark and eventually went to the other countries in the list. He returned to Germany with his family, assuming the rank of Margrave. He took a lot of initiatives when his father died in 1708. This included an attempt to recover certain rights, that according to the contract of Schonberg, was given to Prussia. He also sought to abolish this contract. This initiative was successful in 1722 after long and difficult discussions with the state of Prussia.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The location of George Frederick Charles's tomb should be included with the details of his early life, as it is simple to mention.

text: "Other countries in the list" could be expanded

question: What does the article say about Charles's relationship with his son-in-law?

answer: The article says that Charles was described as a thin, bandy-legged, egotistical, wrong-headed, jealous person. His daughter-in-law, Wilhelmine of Prussia, has written memoirs about their relationship. It is not stated how Charles' relationship with his son-in-law was.

critique: It is stated how Charles' relationship with his son-in-law was.

critique: "It is not stated how Charles' relationship with his son-in-law was." - this is an incorrect statement and should be removed.

critique: The answer should mention that Charles harassed his daughter-in-law.

text: Remove extraneous information about his relationship with his daughter-in-law


text:
Since it was first introduced five years ago, Instagram has overtaken Twitter to become the social media’s rising star for businesses. The platforms base is growing at speed passing the 600 million follower mark in December 2016. Contrary to popular belief, Instagram can work just as well for smaller brands as it does for big brands. So how can you use this platform to your advantage as a small business?

[woman with laptop]

woman with laptop

ENGAGE AND BE ACTIVE

It is no use creating engaging visual images if no one knows you have an Instagram account. The first step to utilising Instagram is to let your customers know that you have a social presence. Put a link to your Instagram account on your website and advertise it on any other social accounts you have and include it in email signatures.

The key to a successful Instagram account is consistency. If you are going to post images, you should do so regularly; the more active the company is on the platform the more you’ll get in return. Try and post on the at the optimum times each week and stick to this routine. Tools such as Social Insights and Iconosquare both have features showing best times to post for maximum engagement and interaction, as well as a host of other analytical tools that can feed into your Instagram activities.

HAVE A TARGET AUDIENCE FOR YOUR CONTENT

Once you have an account set up, it is time to decide what type of content you are going to create to engage your audience. Know who to target with content. Start with your current customer base and from here you can define your target audience in three key demographics; age, gender and location. From this point, your business will not only be able to tailor the content to that audience, but also know the existing channels and hashtags that can be leveraged, putting the company in front of potential and existing customers.

Utilising hashtags these can widen your audience significantly. There are top hashtags that are used specifically for gaining followers on Instagram and you can use these to put your content in front of the audience open for new material.

Above all, keep it relevant and have a theme to your content related to your business. Sons of Sawdust – a woodworking business based in Athens, Ga – operate in a studio space to rework reclaimed wood to create new products. Simply by taking pictures of their work process and posting on Instagram, the company have a natural place for showcasing behind the scenes DIY and woodwork.

[sons-of-sawdust-instagram]

KEEP THE CONTENT CONSISTENT

Over time your followers will form certain expectations of the content you provide and it is advisable to be consistent in order to keep them coming back and engaging with posts. Knowing your target audience and who you want to put your brand in front of will influence the theme to focus on with content.

One simple way to build and develop a theme is to concentrate on one key colour when posting content. As you can see here, Oreo have kept consistency across their posts with a continuous colour scheme and a house style that has been applied to each post.

UTILISE EXISTING MATERIAL FROM THE COMPANY – WHAT’S YOUR USP?

In order to create an engaging Instagram account, it is essential to stand out from the crowd. So where do you start in terms of generating unique content? Your business likely offers a product, service, or experience that is sold to customers through having a unique selling point and you can use this to attract followers.

The London Helicopter has unique access to bird’s eye views of the London skyline every day. The company’s USP lies in offering an experience that people want to see something that very few people have. As a visually led platform, Instagram is the perfect place for the company to showcase these unique views of London and share them with their followers.

[the-london-heli-instagram]

SOCIAL MEDIA DOESN’T HAVE TO BE ABOUT CUSTOMER GENERATION

Social media channels are not simply a quick way to present your latest products to your customer base and boost sales, it is also a great way to excel at customer service and improve customer loyalty.

Instagram has introduced a number of features that makes it easier then ever for customers to communicate with the brands that they follow on Instagram and users can now contact a company directly from the Instagram profile page.

More customers are choosing social media for service requests. According to recent research by J.D Power, 67% of customers turn to social media for enquires and complaints. Here are a few ways brands can benefit from this:

-   TO BOOST PROFITS—Businesses that provide excellent customer service via their social media accounts will see higher profits than brands that neglect this area. Recent research by Aberdeen Group states that brands who excel at customer service benefit from an annual financial gain of 7.5 percent while brands that don’t provide good customer service only see a 2.9 percent rise.
-   BRAND ADVOCACY—A social media presence has the power to turn potential customers into shoppers and shoppers into brand advocates. Customers who have a good experience with a brand on social media are three times as likely to recommend them to a friend and word of mouth is a powerful marketing tool.
-   BUILD A POSITIVE BRAND IMAGE—Social media channels are a great opportunity to show your customer base that you care. Many brands create separate accounts that are dedicated to customer service and with 74 percent of shoppers naming social communities as their main influence when making a purchase.

Social media gives your customers a voice, though that voice won’t always be saying positive things about your brand. How you deal with negative comments on social media can put your brand in the spotlight for all the right reasons and how you acknowledge complaints quickly and efficiently can speak volumes. Responding to complaints in a timely manor can boost customer advocacy by up to 25 percent.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[author image]

_Currently working as a content and business strategist for a number of small businesses that operate on a local and national level, in the past Matt has worked with major global brands' online content & digital PR. He writes about marketing, PR, SEO, and digital strategies for business.…_ _View full profile ›_

------------------------------------------------------------------------

question: What is the objective of this blog?

answer: The objective of this blog is to inform small businesses how to use Instagram to their advantage.

critique: The blog is written by Matt, so the answer should reflect that.

critique: The objective is to inform small businesses how to use Instagram to their advantage as a small business.

critique: The objective of this blog is to inform small businesses how to use Instagram to their advantage.

critique: The answer should mention that the blog is written by Matt.

question: How should a business owner go about deciding what content to use?

answer: The owner should first decide who their target audience is. The business owner should then decide what content they would like to use to engage their audience.

critique: The answer should mention that the business owner should know what their unique selling point is.

critique: The answer should mention that the business owner should also decide what type of content they would like to use to engage their audience.

critique: The answer should mention that the business owner should also know what their unique selling point is.

question: What other social media platforms should the business target?

answer: Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn.

critique: The answer is incorrect. The article does not mention other social media platforms.

question: What advice does the writer give about publishing content?

answer: The writer says that the key to a successful Instagram account is consistency. The writer says that if you are going to post images, you should do so regularly. The more active the company is on the platform, the more you'll get in return.


text:
John MacAndrew bent to the ground, picking up the last piece of wood, he placed it with the others.  John's wife sent him out to the woods to find firewood for the night.

On his way back to the farm, John noticed three men in the woods, traveling down an animal made path.  John was expecting them.  Reivers who were sent out to find John and kill him.  Reivers were raiders along the Scottish/English border consisting of both nationalities.  John had earlier joined forces with the Ross clan who where pursuing a group of reivers who had stolen the cattle of the Ross Clan.  John was one archer of supreme skill and made a name for himself killing reivers with his bow.  At the end of the pursuit, John pulled out his bow and struck the Chief reiver in the eye.

As the men walked down the path they noticed a young man carrying a bundle of wood.  The young man was not a tall one, actually he was rather short in stature, and seemed to have trouble carrying the wood as he stumbled and dropped one piece after another.
"You there boy," the reiver said.  "Do you know a John MacAndrew?"
"I know him," John said.  "I'm the servant."
"I need you to show us where he lives."
"Not sure if I can do that, he doesn't like visitors."
What a surprise, thought the reivers.  John MacAndrew was known for his run-ins with border raiders and was constantly in danger from one seeking a vendetta.
"Tell you what," one of the reivers said.  "I will give you two shillings if you bring us to MacAndrew."
"Two shillings? I guess I could take you to his house."
They followed the boy up the path to a small farm and up to the farm house.  The house was not much to look at, at most it looked like it held two rooms.  Outside the house was an old oak tree, it looked as if it been there for centuries.

Claire MacAndrew placed the last log into the fireplace.  She sat at the large table at the center of the room, the table itself almost took up the entire room, leaving little space to walk.  Where is he?  John should be home by now, thought Claire.  It was a cold night and the fire would not last much longer.  There was a knock on the door.  Claire got up from her seat and opened the small wooden door.  Standing outside was her husband and three large men.  John took off his hat and held it with both hands.
"Excuse me Ms,"  John said.  "Is your husband around?"
"He ran off about an hour ago, but he should be around here somewhere."
Claire and her husband had many encounters with reivers.  She knew all about the dangers that seemed to follow John wherever he went.  Once again she would have to help John escape his troubles.  Where would he be without me?  Dead, perhaps, thought Claire.
"Would you like to come in?"
"Do you have food?" said one of the reivers.
"We always have food for guests, please sit down."
The reivers one by one walk in and sat down at the table.  John also walked it with his hat still in hand as he stood patently by the door.
"Samuel,"  Claire turned to John.  "Go fetch the master,  I think he went to check on the cows."
"Yes Ms."
With a smile John put his hat back on and ran out the door, closing the door behind him.

Once outside, John made his way to the barn located behind the house.  The barn was where the MacAndrew's kept farm equipment and newly slaughtered animals.  Inside there was a newly killed cow.  John placed the cow on his shoulder and carried it back to the house.  Placing the cow against the door, with the flesh side up, made it more of a challenge to open the door from the inside.  John turned around to face the old oak tree.  My favorite tree, thought John as he started to climb.  About six meters up, John reached into a hollow crevice within the tree.  He pulled out a bow and a quiver with a supply of arrows.

Placing three cups on the table, Claire poured water for each of the three men at the table.
"I thought you had food."
"I'm bringing you food, I thought you would want some water first."
At the far end of the house Claire opened the pantry where she stored a small provision of food.  She gathered a arm full of small whole wheel size of cheese.
"I hope you all like cheese."
"Cheese?" said one man.  "She has cheese!"
"A whole wheel of cheese." Claire said.  She made her way over to the men, still seated, eagerly awaiting the first meal in half a day of travel.  While walking to the reivers she slipped and fell onto the newly swept dirt floor.  The balls of cheese bounced and rolled away from her in every direction.  The three men all in a hurry flew from their seats and dived for the cheese, fighting each other for the food.  As if they where rodents, desperate for food, crammed the food into their own mouths as if there was no time to chew.  Suddenly the room was filled with the cry of the young man.
"MacAndrew is coming!"  the boy yelled.  "John MacAndrew is on his way!"
The men struggled to get to their feet.  One choked as he tried to spit a large piece of cheese from his mouth.  They rushed for the door, but there was something pressing against the small wooden door, slowing their escape.

John watched as if someone was struggling to open the door.  The fresh cow carcass was doing what he wished.  John pulled out an arrow from his quiver.  Pulled back on his bow, aimed at the door and waited.  The door slowly by little budged open more and more.  A large jut finally flew the door open as the carcass fell in front of the door with the skinned side facing upwards.  The first of the reivers rushed out.  He slipped on the skinned carcass and landed on his back.  John released his first arrow.  The arrow struck the man in the neck entering from the lower part of the neck and traveled upwards towards the skull.  Reiver number two emerged from the farm house, sword in hand.  He looked around, as if he was scanning his surroundings.  John released his second arrow.  The reiver looked upwards towards the oak tree.  The arrow struck the man in the head, killing him instantly.  The third and final reiver staggered out, still choking on his piece of cheese roll, sword in hand.  The third arrow left John MacAndrew's bow.  Striking the man in the spleen.  The man fell as he screamed in agony.  John released a fourth arrow.  Hitting the man in the stomach, followed by a fifth arrow to the chest.

John placed his quiver of arrows and bow back into the crevice of the old oak tree.  As the climbed back down his wife came out to see what had happened.
"You know they will send more men to find you."
"Let them come,"  John said.  "They are not the first, and they will not be the last raiders I kill."
"Don't you think it would be wise to move north?"  Claire said.  "I mean--away from the border, away from the cattle raiders?"
"Why?  John asked.  "This is our home.  If they want to steal my cattle and my way of living they will have to get past me first.  I'm not going to be chased away from my home."
"I'm just not sure how many times I can get you out of trouble John."
"Don't worry, I'm the best archer this place has ever seen.  I'm not going anywhere soon."

title: John MacAndrew and the Reivers

question: Summarize how John managed to outsmart and eliminate all the reivers.

answer: John pretended to be a servant and led the reivers to his house. He placed a cow carcass against the door to make it difficult for the reivers to open the door. He climbed up the tree and waited for the reivers to exit the house. He shot them with arrows as they tried to escape.

critique: It's omitted that John pretended to be a servant and led the reivers to his house. He placed a cow carcass against the door to make it difficult for the reivers to open the door. He climbed up the tree and waited for the reivers to exit the house. He shot them with arrows as they tried to escape.

critique: It's omitted that MacAndrew placed the wood in such a way that the door would not open easily, giving him time to set up his ambush.

critique: The answer omits John's use of the bow and arrows to kill the reivers.

critique: It's omitted that John pretended to be a servant, which led the reivers to believe he was weak and easy to kill.

critique: The answer omits that John pretended to be a servant so that he could lure the reivers to his house. It also omits how John lured them to his house.

critique: The answer omits John's use of the cow carcass to make it look like he was still inside the house.

critique: The answer omits John's use of the cow carcass to block the door.


text:
He came around, blood dripping from a halo of dyed black hair, and the first thing his mother asked was if he had seen God.

“Did you see him boy? Did you see our Holy Father? I bet he gave you a talking to!” she yelled over the sound of the siren.

The ambulance hit a bump on the road, almost concealing the slight shake of his head that she didn’t notice. He tried to sit up but I gently pushed him down and told him to relax, while I redressed the bandages around his head. I watched his gaze travel to the landscape beyond the window glass that flashed between black and scorching red. His eyes seemed empty, hollow, like a dead man’s. He should be dead – that’s what a bullet to the head does, right?

“You’re a fool, you deserve to go to hell for this,” his mother said. Her nervous eyes glanced back and forth and a silver cross hung from a chain around her neck. She began ruffling through the pages of the bible that she had wasted precious to run and get before letting the ambulance leave. Stray verses and words were mumbled to no one in particular.

He didn’t look at her, or at me, or at the barely noticeable bloodstains in his black tee shirt. He just kept looking outside.

“So what did God say to you? Did he give you a glimpse of Hell? Suicide is a holy sin, you know that,” the woman continued unceasingly.

“Ma’am…” I said softly, but she ignored me.

“You’ll end up in a gutter somewhere with no one but God one day, and you better hope he sees a prodigal son in you,” she said.

His lips moved but no sound came out. He kept his eyes averted, straight out of that window. He tried again, and this time I held up a hand to quiet his mother, who finally took the hint that he had something to say. The first noise was a rough cough, but then words came, barely audible over the wail of the siren.

“There is no God… no God,” he said.

His mother, for the first time that night, appeared speechless, but only for a moment.

“Of course there is, don’t be stupid.”

“No.” He was more forceful the second time. “First there was pain, then darkness, but there was no God, no heavenly lights or flaming depths. There was only Death.”

That time she was struck dumb for real. He took advantage and kept going, his voice getting stronger with each word.

“I looked into the face of Death and saw him for who he is. There were no skulls or sickles, just… his eyes, they…” The boy broke off, unable to describe his vision, although his own eyes showed it all, even as they gazed beyond what the rest of us could see. Neither his mother nor I spoke until he went on.

“He asked me the same question he asks every person who comes to him; why did I deserve a second chance? What made me so special? I told him I wanted to die, that I did this on purpose. He looked at me with those eyes and told me I had to learn to live before I could die, and he sent me back.”

Silence filled the ambulance, and it took me several minutes to realize I had duties to perform, and quickly began running checks and applying fresh bandages. As I checked his blood pressure, he looked at me, and I saw that something had filled in those empty eyes. I knew it and he knew it; he was going to be okay.

title: Ambulance

question: Summarize what the boy sees when he shoots himself.

answer: The boy sees only darkness and pain with no God. He sees Death, its eyes, and Death asks him why he deserves a second chance. Death tells the boy he has to learn to live before he can die.

critique: The boy doesn't see Death; he sees Death's eyes.

critique: Grammar tweaking needed, e.g. add 'a' before 'second chance' since, otherwise, it seems that the boy deserves a second chance more than once.

critique: The boy sees Death's eyes, not Death's face.

critique: The answer omits the boy's vision of Death.

critique: Rather than 'only darkness and pain' he sees 'only Death'

question: Summarize how the mother's reactions shift over the course of the story.

answer: The mother is initially angry and upset that her son has tried to kill himself. She is angry at him for doing it, and she is angry at him for not having seen God. She is also angry at the narrator for trying to help her son. As her son begins to speak, she is initially speechless, but then she begins to speak again. She is angry at him for not having seen God, and she is angry at him for having tried to kill himself.

critique: The narrator is not mentioned as being angry at the mother.

critique: The mother is not angry at the narrator.

critique: The mother is angry at the narrator for trying to help her son, but she is not angry at the narrator.

critique: The first sentence is inaccurate. The mother is initially angry at him for having tried to kill himself, not for having done it.

critique: Remove repetition; remove unnecessary detail.

question: Summarize everything related to religion.

answer: The boy's mother claims that suicide is a holy sin, and she seems to believe in God. The boy's vision included Death, but he claims he saw no God. Death asked him why he deserved a second change and the boy told him he wanted to die. Death told him he had to learn to live before he could die.

critique: The boy's vision included Death, but he claims he saw no God. Death asked him why he deserved a second change and the boy told him he wanted to die. Death told him he had to learn to live before he could die.

critique: The boy's vision did not include Death, he saw Death.

critique: The boy's vision included death, not God.

critique: The boy's vision of Death is irrelevant to the question.

text: The last two sentences are not relevant to the question.

question: What does the story say about the reason the boy wanted to die?

answer: No answer

critique: The response misses to provide an answer to the instruction in the task.

critique: The boy tried to kill himself because he saw death and thought he deserved a second chance.

critique: The answer should mention the boy's vision of Death.


text:
HANK PHILLIPPI RYAN: Do you write book reviews? As an author, I will admit, I tiptoe toward the review section of every website, knowing I might be poking a landmine, but unable to resist. And every author will tell you how important it is to have a good review, how the dashed off and spoiler-filled and mean-spirited reviews are not only knives to the heart, but ratings wrecking.

But I have been writing a different kind of review. The fabulous Criminal Elementis doing a wonderful experiment, are asking authors to review the past Edgar winners for best novel. There was a mad dash among the authors they asked to pick which books to review, and I must say that I was not among the first, so I did not get Day of the Jackal or Eye of the Needle, two faves.   And turns out,  two of the three I was assigned were books I had never read.  (I might say that I had never heard of them, actually. They won the Edgar, and they were not even in my bandwidth! Whoa. )

However! That was the beginning of a wonderful adventure.

[]

The first book I reviewed is A Dark-Adapted Eye by Barbara Vine – the pseudonym for Ruth Rendell.  It was the winner in 1987, and  difficult to judge it from the standpoint of someone reading it then, as well as someone reading it now.

As I wrote:

"I  will admit, I fear, if I had read this book in 1986—when, after all, the best sellers of the year were Danielle Steele, Judith Krantz, Robert Ludlum, Tom Clancy, and Stephen King—I might have given up on this book after a couple of chapters, asking out loud, _is anything going to happen soon_?

And had I done that, I would not have been treated to the glorious, masterful, innovative structure that Vine uses to devise this disturbing puzzle. Gradually, in her own brilliantly created order, Vine lets us in on the whole story, puzzle piece by puzzle piece, without letting us know _where_ the puzzle pieces fit."

In the review, I said:

"But if a new writer pitched this book today, the agent would toss it on the reject pile after the first several pages. Backstory backstory backstory. Family tree family tree family tree, family tree--to the point of excruciating frustration. _Get to the story!_ The agent would cry.

Too bad for the agent. Turns out, the family_ is_ the story."

 It was fun to imagine the discussion of the Edgar committee, you know? Why didn’t they choose P.D. James for _A Taste of Death? Or _ Joe Gores for _Come Morning_, Brian Freemantle for _The Blind Run_, and Roger L. Simon for _The Straight Man?  _What was it about this particular book that made it the most special of the special books? When I wrote near the end was:
"I wish I had been there for the final Edgar vote. “It’s fine, I guess,” someone would have said.

“I think it’s risky,” someone else might have warned.

“This one will become a classic,” said the sage one in the back. And that person was correct. "

 And now I'm working on another review which will come out in a month or so. The book--The Red Scream-- is by Mary Willis Walker,  and it won in 1995. It was a perfect book for me to read, because it's about a reporter, Molly Cates, whose true crime book is about to be published. (Lots of parallels to my TRUST ME and to my own real life.)

[]

Again-- reading it in 1995 would be a lot different from reading it in 2019, right? What was fresh and innovative back then isn’t, frankly, now. And though chronologically that it wasn’t so long ago, in some senses, it was. We didn’t know about #MeToo,  or cell phones, and the Internet was newish.  By the time Mary Willis Walker wrote this book, Sue Grafton was already on L.
But then, reading, I saw what made it more than a savvy-tough-intrepid-working-woman story. I’m still drafting, but I can share an early bit:

"Here’s the clincher: only Molly herself has the opportunity to tell the truth about this crime, the crime that made her career.

But if her  true crime book is based on her own misunderstanding of the crime--if it's _not_ true--how good a reporter is she?

If Molly diligently follows the clues that may lead to the convicted killer’s innocence, doesn’t that make her guilty?

That’s what makes the story so special--Walker’s focus on the choice devoted reporter Molly must make. Can she be true to her "stand up for the little guy" philosophy? If she does, the discovering the pivotal clues might lead to her own personal humiliation and defeat."

And, parenthetically, my researching to write this review revealed another mystery: Where is Mary Willis Walker?

She only wrote four books, that I can find, all of which were incredibly well reviewed, and awarded, and lauded, and then, she vanished!  I found an essay she had written in the New York Times about dropping the Walker from her name after getting divorced. I queried the Facebook hive mind, and no one seems to be able to come up with any more than that. How can a successful writer just vanish? Maybe just… Stop writing. But I would love to know.

(The review won’t be published for a month or so, so make sure you find it on the fab Criminal Element!)

One more thing I’m writing, (actually have written, even better), is the introduction to another book you may not know about: The Bellamy Trial.

[]

American Mystery Classics asked me to write the introduction for their brand new edition of this 1927 classic, and I leapt at the chance with delight. Turns out, it is such a terrific book, (lookit that cover!) and again, right up my legal thriller alley. In fact, some say, with The Bellamy Trial, Frances Noyes Hart wrote the first legal thriller.

There is a tiny part of that introduction.

"Hart is such a clever writer, and this charming novel –which was serialized in the Saturday Evening Post --is hardly just a legal transcript. With Whartonesque overtones and trenchant social commentary, the world of the scandalous crime emerges:  silver dancing shoes, silver flasks, country clubs, cocktail parties, maids, nannies, and families with day and night nurseries. The reader understands the milieu Hart is allowing us to grasp: the attendant wealth and lack of it, the undercurrent (usually under) of class struggles, and the battle for acceptance in tightly-contained social circles. Passionate love and broken promises, parental manipulation, deceit and gaslighting—results that can only come from the lust for money and greed and control."

This book was absolutely a joy to read, and I cannot wait to share it with you. These new editions will be out in a month or so, but I have one here to give away!

TELL ME HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT WRITING REVIEWS, REDS AND READERS, AND ONE LUCKY COMMENTER WILL GET AN EARLY COPY.

(Oh, PS, the third book I am reviewing for Criminal Element is Citizen Vince! Love that book!)

question: What does the text say about the importance of book reviews?

answer: The text documents author Hank Phillippi Ryan praising the importance of book reviews. Hank expresses how important it is to have a good and favorable book review. As an author, Ryan admits to having a working relationship with book reviewers which can be a very dicey, touchy situation and claims you must never be "a spoiler." She also discusses how having a book without a back cover, and worse, without reviews, feels like a landmine waiting to detonate -especially when you put so much hard work into the book. However, Hank also pleads to the importance of being factual and unbiased in a book review. If you must criticize a book, do it from a factual standpoint and inject critical constructive thoughts.

critique: The answer is a summary of the text, not a response to the question.

critique: The response is inaccurate and incoherent.

critique: The article doesn't say anything about book reviewers having a working relationship with authors.

critique: The answer is a copy and paste of the text.

critique: The statement regarding the landmineworking relationship with book reviewers is unattested.

question: What does the text say about the author joining Criminal Element's experiment?

answer: The author was asked to review the past Edgar winners for best novel. The author was assigned three books to review. The first book the author reviewed is A Dark-Adapted Eye by Barbara Vine. The second book the author reviewed is The Red Scream by Mary Willis Walker. The third book the author is reviewing is Citizen Vince.

critique: The author was assigned three books to review, not three books to review.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The answer should mention that the author is excited to join the experiment.

critique: The answer should include that the book's analyses are exclusive to the podcast.

critique: The answer should mention the author's feelings about the experiment.

question: What does the text say about what the author does besides reviewing books?

answer: No answer

critique: The text does mention that the author is an author.

critique: While the answer is empty, it's not wrong and doesn't need to be re-written.

critique: The text mentions that the author writes books.

critique: The text mentions that the author is writing a different kind of review.


text:
My yon sister, Gertie, could not handle the stress of her burden. If all she had to do was carry, fine, but to feel them go cut her deeply. She came to know and dread them - and she always knew. Knew by the timid steps that slowed as they came to her gently swaying middle. Over her wide. Over her deep.  She would cry out “NO!”, but they couldn’t, or wouldn’t, listen. Maybe this will be a mindchange? No. Maybe this one would be the last? No, always more. They knew where she was. More would come, always more.

Our parents had big plans and dreams for our futures. Like most, they did not know The True -when you create a thing, a thing that moves and is loved, you give it life. A thing that moves not, is loved not - lives not. Alive, it can breathe, feel, dream and so many other things not detailed in the blueprints. Many know The True of this in their heart but deny it for reasons I do not understand. They beg aloud for their cold Go to start then stroke its dashboard in thanks. Dolls speak sweetly long past childdays. Why is The True just for children and dim when down deep all know it is so?

Gertie claimed they could not hear her. Her first one took her by such surprise she almost didn’t notice. One minute there, enjoying her company, and then nothing. One thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three, one thousand gone.  She saw no sense. But others came and she marked well the signs. The look, the feel, the smell of them. Some with such cheerful determination she almost thought they wouldn’t. But they would. And they did. They’d come a visit, to say lastgobye. And Gertie would shake and tremble. Why her? Why must she be party to such awfulness? Why not the heartless Poppers? All know not to point them at anylive for The True in them begs a squeezebang. Or The Tall Ones, why not leave from them? Surely the results more certain. And care they not, for TheTrue is so limited in them. Barely a nevermind from them. Perhaps they fear breaking a Go below or taking another person past the gone. When she could stand no more, shaking in tears of despair, Gertie leapt to her own one thousand gone. Where another now stands in her place.

Larger and calmer than most in my family, perhaps The True is stronger in me? For my visitors can hear me as I them, and I am glad of their company. My thoughts to theirs when the winds are well and they would listen. They come to say their last gobyes. For every one that leaves past the one thousand one line a dozen more go back as they came. Some visit often but remain Noyets. There is another day for them. I judge not, nor speak The True as I know it to them. They choose for themselves. Some dawdle so long that they are taken away. I have my doubts of them for some wish to be stopped. But I do not stop anyone. The True is for each own to decide. Taller than my sisters, one thousand four, is such a long way - much longer than most expect. I hear it clickcount in their heads. Time runs quick right up to the one line, then slows so much before the one thousand gone. Maybe The True also wants to say a last gobye?

I am seldom lonely as I get company often. Even the many Noyets that retreat are my friends. When lonely, I reach deep and long to touch other things aways from myself. Some things made strong in The True and some silent, but all pass my voice on to those who would listen. Come visit. Come look. Choose wisely, for yourself. I will not help nor harm. Come they do and always will. And Thank The True they come. For all that live must also eat.

title: My Yon Sister

question: Summarize all the information relating to the author's sister, Gertie.

answer: The author's sister Gertie, who passed away. She had to go through a burden which turned out to be stomach bleeding, due to the young aunt-like doll being eaten by the Floaters. She is probably over the age of 13 as the author brings up menstruation as we presume the pain is associated with the bleeding. Gertie always knew she had these dolls that would come to her because they always indicated by walking like timid footsteps.

critique: The response contains inaccurate information.

critique: The answer is inaccurate and incoherent.

critique: Gertie is not mentioned to have stomach bleeding.

critique: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

critique: The plan by their parents is to offer them a better life*; *None of this is in the text.

critique: The answer should be clearer about the fact that Gertie is not mentioned to be menstruating.

question: Summarize all the information relating to The True.

answer: The True is that which gives life to a loved thing like a child's doll. He also mentions it as a quality of his voice. Or The Tall Ones, why not leave from them? Surely the result more certain. And care they not, for The True is so limited in them. Barely a nevermind from them - is an indication of irritation. When the doll community disappears, a sense of loss and confusing sadness.

critique: The doll community disappearing is not indicated

critique: The True is not a quality of the narrator's voice.

critique: There is no mention of The True being a quality of the narrator's voice.

question: Summarize the information relating to the heartless Poppers.

answer: No answer

critique: The response misses to provide a response to the task.

critique: The response misses to provide an answer to the instruction.

critique: The response misses to provide an answer to the question.

critique: The response misses to mention that the heartless Poppers are not a part of the narrator's family.

question: What is the author's experience of The True?

answer: The True of the author is that they are neither Poppers, nor Tall Ones, they are more of Gertie who then jumps and dies. This is the story of their life with The True.

critique: The True is not the author's experience. The author is relating the experience of their sister.

critique: The True is not the author's experience, but the experience of their sister.

critique: The True is not a person. The author is talking about their sister.

critique: 'This is the story of their life with The True.' clarifies who "they" is and should be in that sentence.


text:
JENKENS & GILCHRIST, P.C. was a Dallas-based law firm, founded in 1951 as Jenkens & Bowens to service the various businesses controlled by Clint Murchison, Jr. _The Dallas Morning News_ was an early client. As a result of the extent of Murchison family holdings, the firm soon developed expertise in corporate transactions.

In the 1980s, the firm faced liability and financial difficulties resulting from involvement in the Savings and Loan Crisis. Jenkens settled a number of malpractice lawsuits in 1987 for $18 million. In the 1990s, Jenkens saw intense growth and added offices outside Texas for the first time to expand from a regional into a national law firm.

Opening a Chicago office with a tax attorney team from Altheimer & Gray in 1998 would become the most fateful act for the firm.[1] In 2000, the firm merged with Parker Chapin Flattau & Klimpl to launch in New York City. By 2001, the firm employed more than 600 attorneys, reaching its peak in size. In 2004, the firm advised Fossil, Inc. in its $173 million secondary securities offering managed jointly by J.P. Morgan, Jefferies & Company, and CIBC World Markets.

Firm's demise

In the 1990s, the Chicago office began a lucrative practice of offering tax shelter advice to a variety of wealthy corporate and individual clients, primarily by drafting opinion letters stating that certain tax schemes were compliant with the Internal Revenue Code. The Chicago tax group earned $267 million from 1998 to 2003. The group worked in coordination with tax advisers at Ernst & Young.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) began investigating Ernst & Young and several taxpayers in 2002. Eventually, it audited many Jenkens clients, who subsequently filed malpractice suits against the firm. In 2003, the IRS itself sued Jenkens & Gilchrist. Facing a substantial potential liability, the firm began to unravel.[2]

As negotiations about settling with the government and other plaintiffs dragged on, partners with portable business began to depart. In 2005, the 90-attorney New York City office from legacy Parker Chapin defected to Troutman Sanders. In 2007, the Los Angeles office decamped to Baker & Hostetler. The remaining partners in the Chicago office switched to Nixon Peabody. Some 100 attorneys in Dallas, Austin and Houston found a new home at Hunton & Williams. The majority of the San Antonio office moved to Texas firm Jackson Walker, LP while Partner Phillip D. Freeman and Associate Nicole Betters, along with many from the Austin office, moved to Winstead.[3]

Finally, the firm agreed to settle its liabilities with the IRS, pay a $76 million fine, and to cease practicing law effective March 31, 2007.[4]

On May 24, 2011, four lawyers with the firm were found guilty of tax evasion, conspiracy, and related charges stemming from a ten-year tax shelter scheme that prosecutors said generated more than $1 billion in fictive losses.[5] As of 2012, the defendants were seeking a new trial after learning one of the jurors lied about her background in order to be selected.[6]

[1] Lynnley Browning, “Inquiry into Tax Shelters Widens Beyond Audit Firms,” _New York Times_, February 4, 2006.

[2] Katie Fairbank and Terry Maxon, “How Jenkens & Gilchrist Lost Its Way,” _Dallas Morning News_, April 1, 2007.

[3] http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/news/8336/24-winstead-attorneys-listed-among-texas-rising-stars

[4]

[5] Patricia Hurtado and Chris Dolmetsch, “Chicago Lawyer Daugerdas Found Guilty in Tax Shelter Trial”, Bloomberg, May 24, 2011.

[6] Bob Van Voris, “Ex-Juror Arrested, Forced to Testify in Bid for New Tax Shelter Case Trial”, Bloomberg, February 15, 2012.

title: Jenkens & Gilchrist

question: Summarise the activities of the firm that led to its demise from the 90s till the mid 2000s.

answer: It was involved in the Savings and Loan Crisis, and soon after was presented with a substantial liability in 2003. They did not want to pay their debts, and started taking business away from the firm. They were sued by the IRS, who had gone over their taxation schemes, and netted a hefty fine and ceased operations in 2007.

critique: "They were sued by the IRS, who had gone over their taxation schemes, and netted a hefty fine and ceased operations in 2007." - missing a few details.

critique: The firm's business practices are omitted.

critique: The firm did not want to pay their debts.

critique: The answer omits the tax shelter scheme.

critique: 'during the 1990s' instead of 'soon after'

critique: The response inaccurately mentions that the firm did not want to pay their debts and started taking business away from the firm.

critique: The firm's activities in the 1990s are omitted.

critique: The question is about the firm's activities from the 90s until the mid 2000s. The answer should be more specific about the events that happened during this time period.