Academic help verification?

Apparently this site seems to be run by a John Paulson. THe email address is
john.academichelp@googlemail.

Anyone has REAL experiences with this site? It seems like a FRAUD all the way.

You are a writing site owner, I can sense! Of which in particular?!

Hey, Freelance Writer! Enough of racism! Structure your argument within the framework of writing capacity regardless of race!

"The writer has no clue when commas are (and aren't) required and most probably isn't even a native English speaker; there's not a chance in hell that was written by a Brit."

And what are Brits anyway? People who cannot even write their own paper and seek out the help of writing sites without knowing that the piece of work they are jubilant about is a work of an ESL writer?

C'mon! Grow up!

A big LMAO!

writerneeded, you clearly own or are associated with that terrible "service." The jig was up a long time ago, crook.

Venus, FreelanceWriter did not mention a single word about race. Being a "Brit" has absolutely NOTHING to do with skin color or ethnic background.

FYI, "writerneeded" is NOT a customer or a Brit. He is the ESL writer who owns or is associated with that terrible "service." He is so horribly unqualified that he posted that paper (senseless drivel) in an effort to "impress," not realizing that it is total garbage.

I have not seen a bigger bimbo than you. Frankly, are you a "school" drop out? M sure they would have thrown you out because of your habit of messing up with people.

The paper is a total garbage? Do you know how to spell economics? Have you ever heard the term monetary policy? FYI, it is something Bernanke comes out with every year.

Do you know who he is? Lol.... If you were to write a paper, you would only write the history of people whom you call crooks without any proof because you cant contemplate anything else besides that. The (so called) thing between your ears would not take it.

Only an immature person like you can rebuke a deep macro economic policy paper just because it has a few mistakes here and there.

You need treatment asap. Btw, you are quite good at provoking people but believe me everyone will soon realize that it is just another way to keep the site kicking. Employ depressed, melancholic, frustrated with life bimbos to provoke people.

I sincerely wish you good luck and a faster recovery. Good bye...

Thanks, WB.

Venus, my only point was that Brits generally have much better grammar than American native speakers. That lousy paper is written in English replete with grammatical mistakes that nobody who learned English in the UK would ever make. Last I checked, "Brits" includes individuals of all races and ethnicities, all of whom would be equally insulted by any inference that the posted paper was written by them.

I never meant it was in perfect language or it was written by a brit. I just said I got value for money and frankly I dont mind those small mistakes. As long as there is no blunder in grammar, m fine with it.

Nobody has time to go through a paper word by word. It is the concept which does the talking...

Yes, the paper is "a total garbage," just like your grasp of the English language.


Either you haven't read the paper or you don't have even the remedial skill necessary to recognize the gluttonous amount of grammatical errors.

ROFLMAO!!! ^__^


While I am usually inclined to agree with anyone who puts the "immature" tag on WB, your description of your work as "a deep macro economic policy paper" is just plain preposterous. Even if we disregard all of the grammatical errors and all the lapses in proper academic word choice, it's still nothing more than a poorly stitched rag doll of a paper. There is no synthesis of ideas. You're just throwing what you got from the internet into a distasteful mix of poorly written paragraphs hoping that in all the confusion, the paper might pass as something acceptable to a grader. While that might have worked in this case based on your story, it's hardly what I'd call "deep" writing.

(*number* of errors)

(^_-)

You know, when you attempt to correct ME, it will only come back to bite you in the ass.

FYI, "gluttonous AMOUNT" is perfectly correct, and I dare you to prove otherwise.

W.B., I think you're reacting to good natured ball busting as though it were a personal attack. I have no reason to attack you and apologize if it came across that way, ok?

That said, the problem had nothing to do with gluttonous, but if you really want to be nitpicky about it, "gluttonous" does imply the taking, hoarding, or the consumption of something. A large number of grammar problems isn't really something one would characterize as "gluttony," you know?

The original comment was simply a reminder (on a thread discussing grammar) that amount only applies to things incapable of being counted individually, such as money, water, food, pride, etc. For anything capable of being counted individually, such as dollars, water bottles, hot dogs, mistakes, or good natured jokes, it's always number, not amount.

(Still) no offense intended though.

FreelanceWriter, I did not quote you.

Mod, there is something wrong with the quotation system. I highlighted text posted by EW_writer and clicked on the "Quote" link. The system then incorrectly inserted FreelanceWriter as the source of the quote. Can you please fix this problem?


That is not SOLELY the case. The definition of "gluttonous" revolves around a person, place, or thing that engages in or enjoys ANY activity "to excess." The word is most commonly used in connection with the over-consumption of food/drink, but that is NOT the sole function.

One of the definitions of "amount" is "a number." Regardless, I did not take the time to count every error; therefore, from my personal experience, the "number" of errors remained indefinite, so I could not quantify the breadth/extent of errors as a "number."

WTF? You're not taking your meds again. >.< It was FreelanceWriter who corrected you and based on his justification, I'm inclined to agree with him. You were referring to a discreet quantity (errors) and therefore "number" rather than "amount" would be the more appropriate term to use. Your justification that the two are synonymous is simplistic and off-tangent since we're not taking about grammatical correctness here but more of writing style sophistication. Your second excuse that the number of errors is infinite also cannot fly since even if the said number is infinite which is highly doubtful to begin with, the quantity is still discreet. "Amount" is a more appropriate term for continuous quantities such as sugar or sunlight.

Listen WB, I was not trying to embarass you by mentioning your own grammar error in a post where you were criticizing someone else's grammar. But you're now embarassing yourself by making up these convoluted excuses instead of simply accepting that you used the wrong word. MISTAKES are capable of being counted individually. It doesn't matter whether or not their exact number is actually KNOWN. Just the same as you would refer to a huge sack of copper pennies as containing a large NUMBER of coins but a large AMOUNT of copper.

Same goes with "gluttonous": it makes no more sense to refer to a "gluttonous number of mistakes" than to a "gluttonous amount of rain."

It's no big deal. Everybody makes mistakes occasionally, even you.

First of all, FU.

Secondly, my mistake. The "(^_-)" signature of FreelanceWriter's post made me think it was you.

Thirdly, did I type "infinite"? No. I typed "indefinite," meaning that--since I did not take the time to count--it was IMPOSSIBLE for me to determine a "number."

amount
1. the sum total of two or more quantities or sums; aggregate.
2. quantity
3. the full effect, value, or significance
dictionary.reference.com/search?q=amount

I could not personally quantify a particular number because I did not take the time to count. I used "amount" as a means to communicate my focus on the general significance and breadth of the errors. End of story.

Why do you keep using my name when you quote the retard? >.<


Not on your life. :P


Well woop-dee-doo to that. :P Even if the number is indefinite, the quantity is still DISCREET. ^_^ Thus, "number" is still more appropriate. XD Sadly, your writing skills do not extend to scientific realms of the trade which is why you fail to see my point. >.<


This is crap and everyone can see the amount of b*lls-i* you're making with the numberof times you keep defending yourself. So there. :D

Haha!

You didn't.


a post in which


grammatical error OR error in grammar

Unless we (qualified writers) want to take the time to closely scrutinize every word of every one of our posts before clicking that "Post Message" button, it's best not to nitpick. Frauds are those whose final, paid product contains embarrassing errors--and they don't even recognize it! Those people deserve to be nitpicked simply to make them recognize that they are ripping-off customers.


Your constant name-calling serves only to highlight your immaturity and lower standing.


Nice try. This discussion has absolutely NOTHING to do with "science."


Ah, so now you're disagreeing with dictionary.com?

I'm not calling you names, you are a retard. :P

Did dictionary.com use the word the same way you used it? :P

OK, but you still owe all of us that portion of our lives back that we wasted ever since you couldn't just type the words "Oops...my bad...number of errors...LOL" after a friendly attempt at humor.

There was no "error," and I proved it.


I'm not going to humor you any more. I'll stick to adult conversations.

Ei, Writers Beware and EW_Writer, may I remind you that this thread is for discussions about scams and beng scammed only. Enough of senseless, silly arguments that relate not to these. Let's step up to sensibility.

Cheers!

OK, Mr. 15 posts.

:p

LOL... I just love kicking your a. ^_^

Too bad it's never happened.

Keep scraping by on that dirty money from EssayWriters.net.

Tsk tsk... you really should do something about that deteriorating memory. :D

Please, remind me. Please direct everyone to this purported "ass kicking." LOL!

Sigh.. there we go again. ^_^ Everyone here knows very well how often I kick your sorry ass. No links are necessary, they just need to click on the threads where we've clashed to remember.

Say, I just had an interesting thought...

Oh Lavinia, what can you say about WB's side on our little writing style argument here?

Coward.


Is THAT what you consider an "ass kicking"? LMAO! You're PATHETIC. I already proved that MY use of wording was perfectly valid because of MY personal circumstance. I know--it's beyond your comprehension boundary. I then went on to prove that the person who "jokingly" attempted to correct me typed two, ACTUAL errors!

Someone has a truly "gluttonous" "amount" of self delusions.


Do "YOU" honestly think that a SINGLE person reading that nonsense actually believes that it's correct to say "amount of errors" instead of "number" of errors just because "YOU" didn't count the number of errors you referenced?

The only things you "proved" are: (1) you're an exremely pompous and insecure person who takes offense that anybody would even "dare" to suggest that maybe you're not quite the grammarian you think you are, and (2) there are absolutely no limits to the silliness of the self-justifying arguments you will pull outta your ass to avoid admitting you're totally wrong even when it's completely obvious to any objective person that you are.

Those are your "personal circumstances."

Amen.

Congratulations on allying yourself with an admitted fraud and criminal.


Sorry, but you forgot the hyphen, amateur.


I typed it, actually.


I'm better than you on my worst day.


Sorry, but I already proved otherwise. Try actually COMPREHENDING my explanation.

You're the one who's too stubborn to admit that you made a J-A out of yourself by trying to correct me. Oh, and are you actually denying the existence of the IRREFUTABLE errors in your posts?


Ah, so you'd like to play word games? I know that your employers visit this forum, and I'm sure they'll be quite interested in how you've stabbed them in the back. You're admittedly taking orders from EssayScam members after having established your credibility through your employer's name recognition. So, if you keep sticking your nose where it doesn't belong, I'll direct your employers to this thread and your "personal circumstances" will change. You stay out of my business, and I'll stay out of yours.

Sheessh.. how sore can ya' get? >.<

Hey, you guys attacked ME.

I tried to drop it with you long ago, but you never stop.

Well let's see... You you pounced on me thinking that I was the one who criticized you.

Yes, and immediately thereafter I typed the following:

"Secondly, my mistake. The '(^_-)' signature of FreelanceWriter's post made me think it was you."

Did you stop? No.

You're truly an idiot.

All I've done on this site with respect to my employers is DEFEND their businesses as being 100% legit. I'm allowed to cultivate any "amount" of private clients I wish from ANYWHERE I wish except directly on any of the sites I work for. And if my employers visit this forum, they already know I'm here and that I have no reason to hide that, or anything I've said here.

Please, by all means, explain again why it's not incorrect for "YOU" to say "amount of errors" instead of number of errors. Is it also correct for "YOU" to say "amount of pennies" and "number of copper"? I'll try my best to "COMPREHEND" your nonsense this time.


You're the one who brought my nose back into this with your references to mistakes of mine you think you "proved" after I pointed out that someone whose own grammar isn't so great shouldn't be such a critic of others'.

This was an argument about GRAMMAR you dope, not about anybody's "business." You'e a vindictive little putz who actually threatened to try to ruin someone's livelihood to retaliate for being embarassed over your less than perfect grammar and word usage. Your obvious delusions of grandeur are evident in the way you always capitalize "ME" and "MY" in your posts, which speaks volumes about you as well.

Hi,

The work doesn't seem to be that professional though...
Don't see you getting that much grade...

Regards

Remember, I warned you . . . .


You introduced yourself as a "writer for *********," therefore garnering consumer confidence through *********'s name recognition. You then admittedly received several orders from EssayScam members who would have otherwise gone directly to ********* or one of the other sites you listed as employers. Therefore, you stole money from the company.


amount
1. the sum total of two or more quantities or sums; aggregate.
2. quantity
3. the full effect, value, or significance

I could not personally quantify a particular number because I did not take the time to count. I used "amount" as a means to communicate my focus on the general significance and breadth of the errors. End of story.


Following are your irrefutable errors:


correct = a post in which


correct = grammatical error OR error in grammar


I pointed out TWO glaring errors in one of your posts, so you're hardly an expert.


I use ALL CAPS to highlight ANY word on which I wish to direct FOCUS.

Actually the very notion of a FREELANCE writer is that you CAN garner work from anywhere and by any means.

There is no stipulation in ANY contract with these companies that prevents the writer from promoting their own writng abilities and getting customers in this way. Freelancewriter could have just as easily emailed the posters on here and offered his services and no one would be the wiser. One of the problems with this site is that it encourages writers and companies to promote their own business, although that is purportedly not the intention of the site.

Most students prefer to go to the sites as it offers them a degree of protection if the work is substandard or plagiarised, however, with the reputation of many companies being attacked in this site it is hardly surprising that writers can pick up private work through this site.

With all due respect, I doubt that you have read the contract. There is likely some type of no-compete clause, dictating that the freelancer may not offer his services in the name of the company and then charge less than the company itself. A freelancer is certainly free to obtain any work from any source, but absolutely not by undercutting his/her existing employer.