Some of this may be true. And I think your assumptions are unintentional. What I mean is, a lot of people write poorly because they never learned how. Or they don't care enough. They just don't know how to spell, or where to put commas. They don't know what words should be hyphenated. There are so many things that a human teacher doesn't have time to teach and test.
Pretty sure you are just begging the question here. And that's a fallacy BTW. I'm not accusing you of having circular reasoning. Maybe this instance it's appropriate for a universal exception. I'm not really sure, but I think we all get the premise you have laid out.
I think they are the same animal. That simply wear different disguises.
I've been using it for about a month. I had a different program a while back but it's not supported anymore. My main problem with writing is I often overthink things. That leads to the land of irrelevancy, like begging the question.
It's not splitting hairs. Splitting hairs means there is a minimal difference between training wheels and a teacher. So now I'm honestly wondering if you have ever ridden an actual bike before. Like do you not understand that most of learning to control the bike happens after the wheels come off. There's not a minimal difference between being good on a bike and biking with the wheels on. It's a completely different experience. I actually had a bike that had training wheels, and they didn't teach me shit!
I am simply trying to clarify the example I was making because you implied that you didn't understand the point I was trying to make about how people write the way they talk. Not everything is a fallacy either.
Okay, what I am saying is really just the compartmentalized version of what you are saying. As an incremental approach to learning writing, it is like using training wheels if you look at different aspects of learning to write individually. So for me, a teacher suggested using Grammarly to help correct my passive voice years ago. Therefore, passive voice is like the bike, and Grammarly is like the training wheels that would catch me when I was about to fall. Over time, I have fewer and fewer errors flagged as passive voice because of this, just like at a certain point your training wheels start to scrape the ground here and there because you aren't using them as much anymore.
This doesn't mean that there aren't other things that I need to work on or that I never have this error, but I was able to correct this because Grammarly caught me before I fell the way training wheels catch you before you fall and break your nose. However, learning to write is much more complex than learning to ride a bike so it is clearly not a literal comparison to riding a bike. What I am trying to say, is that you can improve in your ability to write so that features provided by Grammarly are not needed anymore.
In addition to this, using training wheels is an expression and a common way of conveying that something is good for a beginner. So I am also suggesting that Grammarly is a good tool for a beginner with a common figure-of-speech. It is not a literal comparison to begin with.
In addition to this, there is minimal difference between a teacher and training wheels when you remove the abstraction and recognize that teaching is really just a more complex form of a similar function. Training wheels are a function provided by teachers at the most basic level, or at an incremental level, which is why it is used as a common figure of speech.
At a certain point, Grammarly isn't going to help. I don't know how it is helping you identify irrelevant comments. Those are harder to develop an algorithm to identify. Your writing is pretty good already, by the way. Learning to write concisely, which is what you are talking about, requires training the eye for repetition and biting the bullet when removing irrelevancy requires removing something that you really, really like, so that the overall message is more concise. How is Grammarly helping you with this?