ARE AUSTRALIANS EXISTING UNDER A FAILED DEMOCRATIC GOVERNING SYSTEM, THAT HAS BECOME COMPLACENT AND NEGLIGIBLE OF NO SUCH EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST HUMAN LIFE IS EQUAL BUT INSTEAD STRONGLY SUGGESTS THAT HUMAN LIFE IS VIEWED, AS AN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY TO BUSINESS FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE. SYSTEMS DESIGNED, WITH GOVERNMENT SUPPORT MODELED OF MISCONCEPTIONS THEY ARE INDEPENDENT OF EACH OTHER ACROSS ONE SOCIETY MORE RELIANT OF THEM, WITH MISINFORMATION GENERATING ABUNDANT CONFLICT & CONFUSION AS EACH GROW MORE INDEPENDENT OF GOVERNMENT SHARED RESPONSIBILITY & REDUCED ACCOUNTABILITY. SYSTEMS DESIGNED WITH AN ONUS GUIDED BY REASONABLE DELIVERY, AN UNDEFINED TERM OF NO DEFINITE BOUNDARIES SET WITHIN LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS SAID TO PROTECT HUMAN LIFE YET ALLOWING MORAL & ETHICAL LINES BLURRED OF ANY REASONING, WHEREBY IMPROVED SYSTEMS INTRODUCED HOLD A PRIMARY FOCUS OF CREATING HUMAN DEMAND BEFORE SUPPLY OF SERVICE. WITH THE FOCUS FIRST ON FINANCIAL ASSURANCE OF A SYSTEMS LIFETIME, WITH CLEAR EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST DEMAND FIRST OF FINANCIAL GAIN DIRECTLY FROM INDIVIDUALS DISADVANTAGED BY CULTURE DERIVED OF INEQUALITY, DECIDED BY PRIVATE STAKEHOLDER INTEREST MARKETING SELECTIVE SOCIAL AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS. SOCIAL INEQUALITY WHERE FOCUSED DEMAND DECIDES VALUE ON GROUPS OF HUMAN LIFE, REFLECTIVE OF BIAS EVIDENCE THAT STILL MAINTAINS ACCURACY AS TO MARGINALISED HUMAN LIFE INCREASINGLY SUFFERING WHERE AN ONUS EXISTS OF AN INDIVIDUALS TOLERANCE, AS NEGLECT REMAINS CONSISTENT WITH BIAS SETTING CRITERIA DENYING HUMAN LIFE BASIC REPRIEVE OF ENDURING & RELENTLESS HUMAN TOLERANCE, UNABLE OF SUCH EXTREMES SO MUCH SO THE ANSWER TO SUFFERING IS A BRUTAL ACT ILLEGAL AS IT MAY BE THE ONLY SOLUTION TO CRITERIA THAT DOES NOT ACCEPT!!!! WHY IS ONE VERY SPECIFIC GROUP OF HUMAN LIFE OF A SPECIFIC AGE GROUP FORCED TO COMMIT SUCH AN ACT, OR SHOULF THE QUESTION BE WHY IS THIS SO WELL KNOWN OF BUT CONTINUALLY IGNORED AND AVOIDED BY THOSE HEAVILY FUNDED SPECIALIST PRIVATE COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS (FUNDED ANNUALLY BY THIS AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT ENSURING THE WELL-BEING PF THE COMPANY OR SYSTEMS STAKEHOLDERS REQUIRE RETURNS OF)

This page is misleading. It claims to have 35,000+ reviews, but there are only five reviews, including mine. I think the claim of 35,000 reviews is a marketing ploy to make the app seem more popular than it really is. If you look at the reviews, they are all from people who have never used the app. If you look at the app itself, it has a lot of bugs and is not user-friendly. If you are thinking about downloading this app, be sure to read the reviews carefully and make sure that you understand what you are getting into.

This is very useful. You can try it when you don't know how to reply to the email. It provides great help.

It creates a reply based on the content of the email, which you can then modify and edit, which is great.