AccessEssays.com --> FRAUD from the Philippines

You obviously miss the entire point of this thread.

Whether or not a person is competent, hardworking, or Filipino has absolutely no correlation to whether or not the person is a CRIMINAL CONSPIRATOR. Some of the brightest minds on the planet--of various ethnicities--are criminals!

Any foreign, ESL writer who knows that his/her employer is misrepresenting his/her experience, qualifications, educational achievement, and/or geographical location to the American public is a CRIMINAL CONSPIRATOR.

Contrary to what you seem to believe, it is possible to be simultaneously competent, hardworking, Filipino (or any other race), AND a criminal.

Hahaha! Got you again! You really are quite pathetic at defending arguments. You insist on side-stepping other issues brought forward to the discussion just so you can keep on proving a point over and over again. You're like a broken casette player turned on auto-rewind.

If by your standards, anyone who works for a non-american company posing as an american company is a criminal, fine. So I'm a criminal in your eyes and in the eyes of all the other american writers who I supposedly "steal' customers from.

However, does that prove that I am an incompetent writer? no. Does that prove that a majority of the writers who work for the sites you are against are incompetent? no. Like you said:


Thank you so much for that, fatso. I think I've gotten what I came for from you.

Oh that leaves just one more thing...

You've yet to tell me when and where I'm supposed to meet this "husband" of yours. Oh I assure you that I intend to meet him. If he does want a fight, I'll send him back to you on a wheelchair. I'll be waiting.

joey, in this thread you've proven yourself an incompetent thinker, which is worse than being an incompetent writer. well done.

Right! Is using unproven insults for one-liners supposed to make you look smarter than you are, Lavinia? I haven't said a cruel word to you the entire time that I've been posting on this thread because I thought you had enough brain matter to understand my situation and that of others like me. Tell me, was I mistaken? I asked you once earlier in the thread, if you don't want us to work for the non-amrican companies that we work for now, where do you want us to earn living from? Obviously, we can't work for sites that really do hire only American writers living in America. What do you want us to do?

no, i don't need posts to prove my intelligence. i posted for two reasons:

1. to demonstrate that i was marginalized and disgusted by your posts
2. to demonstrate my joy at your implied promise of no more posts

joey, my disdane for you has nothing to do with your socioeconomic position or your decision to work for a company that i view as fraudulent. it has everything to do with your obnoxious, sexist, bullying argumentative tactics.

since you claim to be a writer, you should understand that rhetorical decisions influence the impact of a message as much as, and in some cases, even more than the substance of the message itself. you're a sexist bully who thinks that it's not only ok but a preferred tactic to make up garbage about an individual's weight and personal life to discredit their opinions.

i would have liked to engage in a thoughtful debate about our disagreement over the ethics involved in supporting a corrupt business. i'd enjoy getting a multicultural perspective and i think i could have offered some constructive comments regarding your business position. however, it's clear to me that such a discussion would never happen because you would inevitably default to insults.

so, do what you do best. tell me i'm fat, that my husband doesn't exist, that i'm mentally disabled, whatever you think makes you look smarter. so long as you understand that doing so only proves my point.

i completely agree, lavinia. sexism should have no place in this forum. sexist remarks sorely get in the way of intellectual discourse and worse, try to degrade the value of a person, which in most cases is a woman.

your sexist remarks against writersbeware assail not only her but other women as well--your female friends, former teachers, sisters, aunts, mother and grandmothers. how low do you regard the sexuality of a woman, joey009? are you forgetting that half of you came from your mother--obviously a female--and that you were cultured in a female, possibly very fat womb and that, best of all, you came out into this world through that very female opening (unless of course you were delivered via CS)?

female sexuality is sacred and shouldn't be made a personal tool of insult, mockery, or even argumentative self-defence.

First of all, we have no problem with you working for "non-American companies," as long as those "non-American companies" openly admit their "non-American" status, instead of purposely deceiving the American public.

Secondly, your unfortunate circumstance is not the American public's problem. Your plight, which has absoluteliy NOTHING to do with America, does not justify the fraud that you perpetrate against Americans. You knowingly work for "non-American companies" that falsely claim to be American in order to SEDUCE and steal from American consumers. You have no right to defraud American consumers.


If you are as competent as you claim to be, simply start your own company and write for people in your OWN COUNTRY, instead of defrauding Americans.

The fat-assed ***** deserved everything she got. Are you saying that just because I use foul language when addressing that pathetic swine, my arguments are of no value? I truly thought you were better than that.


I call the ***** an exception.


Why should we when there are non-american companies who'd hire us and pay us as long as we do good work for them?

Hey, what's the date and place, fatso?

Your mother is a pathetic failure, having raised such a worthless sack of skin. Rest assured, you will get what you deserve (all 130, dog-eating lbs. of you), in more ways than one. That's the fate of crooks.

You're just bitter because you can't refute my facts and reasoned arguments.

Would you like some cheese with your whine?

what lavinia is saying is that your arguments are so weak that you resort to foul language to try to project that you're winning. no debater having the upper hand will call the adversary names because there is no need to.

from an objective stance, you really are not making good sense of your position. now, assuming that you really do, yet you resort to foul insults, then you're only giving out your ill breeding.

this is a forum for writers, for heaven's sake. there is no sexist theme herein, neither censorable content to match your language. so, please be respectful of everyone, without any exception!

So its only Americans you are worried about defrauding? There was I thinking this was a crusade against poor academic quality of essays when in fact it is just about Americans getting ripped off!

When I used to write essays I would never take on work for anything other than UK clients as my speciality is law. It would be impossible for me to write a law essay for a student from another country as the laws of each country are so widely different. However if my speciality had been psychology most of psychology books are written by Americans so it would have been easy to write for American students. (I wonder if the reason that most psychology books are written by American because they have more psychological problems than any other country).

The point I am trying to make here is that the person best placed to write an essay for an American student would be an American writer as they would know the style required by the universities there. By the same token the best person to write for a UK student would be a UK writer. How many of Americans on here who are writers have written for UK students? I am guessing there will be quite a few though how many dare admit it is debatable. As an American writer you are no more qualified to write for a UK student then you would be to pilot a rocket to the moon.

I think that WB's reference to Americans is contextual. If you read the first post in this thread, WB points out that this group specifically targets American consumers. In particular, they have several fake offices in the U.S. that they believe helps them to create the illusion of legitimacy.

in addition, WB was answering the following from joey:


so, WB's response focusing upon Americans was again contextually based.

Do you agree though that I have a valid point that essay writers are really only qualified to write for people from their own country of origin as only someone who is from the same country as the student would know how to write an essay that would be of the expected standard and vocabulary of that student.

The grading systems between the UK and the US are entirely different, therefore UK writers should not write for American students and American writers should not write for UK students.

I remember you said that you are a writer. Do you write exclusively for American students or have you written for students in other countries?

i'm not a censor and i have a pretty high tolerance for vulgarity in general. However, i'm not about to sift through your posts of *****, sexually graphic insults and threats in some attempt to discern the essence of your arguments. if you think audiences are willing to do that for speakers, then i respectfully suggest you take a communications class or 3.


julie, if you read my posts, i'm pretty sure that I've posted at least once that I only write essays for American students.

now, i remember you said you'd post evidence to back up your assertions about a substantial majority of students using essay companies to cheat. so... where is that evidence?

I will do that later on. At the moment I am celebrating my birthday so am only on here briefly whilst my son finishes cooking my tea.

Well, they do. It's just that because you resorted to getting your kicks out of making our resident hater of "non-American writers writing for Americans without telling them that they aren't Americans" feel bad, :p you've given everyone here an excuse to claim that you are nothing more than a sexist moron. It's called Ad hominem. I've read through some of your posts and minus all the swear words, you do make decent arguments.

Best of luck on your match with lanchaw bin's hubby. :) Please do let us know how that turns out. :D At the moment, that's the only thing in this thread that interests me. ;)

no, it's not. you don't claim to be qualified to write essays on communication theory or fallacies do you? an ad hominem involves pointing out a characteristic of the speaker that is irrelevent to the argument as a means of discrediting that argument. my objection isn't an ad hominem for two reasons:

1. sexist language isn't irrelevent because it marginalizes a significant percentage of the speaker's audience.

2. I don't ever get to the point of discrediting or even considering the speaker's argument because of his chosen rhetoric.

since you clearly know so much about communication theory, i assume you understand that there is a distinction between the locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary aspects of speech. and you should understand that my criticism was illocutionary and perlocutionary in nature.

if you want to use an appropriate speech term to fit my objection to joey's comments, try "performative contradiction." joey's speech acts are undermined by his performance. he can't credibly critique WB for being discriminatory while also being discriminatory himself. that should sound familiar, eh EW?

Lavinia, I hope you don't expect proper word use or context from an EW supporter.

= The fallacy of a fourth term.

I won't bother ridiculing you for misspelling "irrelevant". :p (Petty things like that are more up lanchaw bin's alley) What I'd like to point out is yet another logical fallacy committed. "Irrelevant" assumes a different definition in each of your statements above. In the first statement, it assumes the definition of "having nothing to do with what joey is saying". In the second it assumes the definition "having nothing to do with important concerns of the people listening to joey". I don't have to tell you that an argument cannot be considered valid when the middle term behaves in this manner. :)

*like you would believe me, hahaha... Oh wait, we have a lawyer among us, right? What do you think, Julie?

When are you going to learn that you must place the period INSIDE of the closing quotation mark?

You claim to be a "professional" writer in the English language?


I'm not surprised that you (an ESL writer who is completely disconnected from American society, yet defrauds American customers by claiming to be a "native English-speaking professional") continue to use non-American terms that Americans do not understand. I'm sure that you include similar, non-American terms throughout the papers that you write for the American clients. I'm quite positive that you place periods OUTSIDE of closing quotation marks, as well. Good work!

ew, when i respond to you i feel like i'm hitting a 6 year old with a stick.

your decision to point out my spelling error doesn't distract from your complete inability to respond to the substance of my post. my error can be fixed with spell check, yours requires a lot more work.

i could concede your entire previous post and it does nothing to disprove my post because you completely concede reason #2. i could even concede that i used an ad hominem and i'd still be ok, since not all ad hominems are bad. my original objection to joey's rhetoric was not that he used an ad hom but that his rhetoric was sexist and vile.

and fallacy of a fourth term? woooooah. now there's a fallacy that no one has cared about for a couple hundred years. and the scholastics did nothing to advance human reasoning for five hundred years except to categorize and name Aristotle's syllogisms. once again, you demonstrate a blatant misunderstanding of the term. i wasn't making a syllogism (you do know what they are right?). and, it's the same definition of irrelevant - whether joey is sexist has much to do with whether joey gets to credibly accuse others of discrimination.

hey, maybe in your next response, you can really get me by pointing out that i don't capitalize the first word at the beginning of a sentence. that'll show me.

you've hit a new low by defending sexist rhetoric.

You really are known by many names. Most Filipinos know a bit of Chinese enough to understand that word. I'd say that that's a name that suites you best, *****.

Still waiting for the date and time, *****.

Joey009, you're a sub-human dog-eater, completely unworthy of my keystrokes.

Nobody here believes or respects anything that you type. I'd bet that's fairly similar to how people treat you in the real world, isn't it, little man?

You are incredibly sad. You literally bring a tear to my eye. Are you bed-ridden, and your only solace is a laptop through which you can type away your bitterness and sorrow? No healthy person with even a faint amount of hope or self-esteem would engage in your current schedule of daily insults against people whom you know type the truth about your crimes. Tell me--deep down, do you love yourself at all?

When lying in bed each night, having been beaten down yet again by the drudgery of your own existence, do you think about ending it all? Do you think about stopping the pain? It must be difficult knowing that not a single, earthly sole loves you. Even if you were to take your own life, it wouldn't make a ripple. You've already accepted that fact, but it hurts, doesn't it?

I feel sorry for you, because you have about as much to look forward to in life as a racehorse with a broken leg. At least when a racehorse dies, its death means a little something. Its death contributes something to society--glue. No, not the glue that you sniff to ease your depression, but the glue that will one day affix the small piece of paper to your cheap, stapled together, pine casket, reading:

"Here lays Joe Doe."

By virtue of your persistent and constant use of *****, you're proving you're such a DOG, hound joey009.

Take EW's advise.

This is a democratic forum. Your opinions are all yours to keep or express.

Unfortunately, however, everybody here apparently agrees that you are a SEXIST MORON.

That is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. >.< Is it safe to say that you're one of the people who actually buys "God is Love- Love is Blind - God is Blind" arguments? Sheesh... I'm sorry but people in the academe care very much about sound logic. (-_-);;


syllogism - a logical argument (from my old & dusty dictionary)

Yep... I guess you weren't making a syllogism. :)


So... if you have a thief accusing another thief of being a thief, are we to expect that a U.S. court of law as a general rule would not admit the testimony of the testifying thief? >.<

Oh I'm sorry, did I just feed you your stick? Hahaha...


I didn't make any. (-_-);;


When are you going to develop from a over-glorified grammar & style checker to an actual person? :)

I make more in BANK INTEREST (on payments earned from HONEST, LEGITIMATE writing) than you make in a year from your worthless, criminal lfestyle. What do you make per year from scamming American customers--30K, in a GOOD year?

LOL!

tsk tsk.. sorry, I've too much to do to humiliate you all over again. :) For the moment let me just say that yes, I do earn about $30,000 a year from my part-time stint at ew providing excellent work for clients around the world. Where I live, that amount is just about enough to pay cash for a 1-br, 30sqm house in the metro area. It's not that big, but it's certainly a start. :p

a fallacy of the fourth term requires a syllogism. no syllogism, no fallacy of the fourth term. seriously, stop with the google searches on fallacies, they aren't doing you any favors.

you didn't get my reference to the scholastics b/c you have no clue what you are talking about. you'd fit right in with them. once again, you bring up a logical fallacy that no one in the academy has written about or cared about for centuries. sound logic is good... specifically targetting one of the 200+ Aristotelian fallacies... good only if wanting to sound pompous while simultaneously having nothing original to contribute. do you really think that academic logic hasn't progressed beyond Aristotle?

let's check the score real quick. you concede that i didn't make an ad hom because you conceded reason #2 again. you further conceded that i didn't make a fallacy of the four terms because the definition was consistent and i didn't make a syllogism (get a better dictionary, yours sucks).

so... why exactly did you post?


of course credibility has a lot to do with the value of the witness' testimony.

let's use a really simple example that gets used in first year comm. theory classes so maybe even you might understand. President Bush gives a speech detailing his plan to fix the U.S. healthcare system. His plan is perfect, it's amazing, it will fix all of the current problems within a very fast time frame and at a minimal cost. however, in describing his proposal he uses the "n" word 6 times.

the next morning, all media coverage will be focused upon his language choice. no one cares about the content of his message because of the language choice and discrimination conveyed. words produce consequences beyond the content.

joey posts to the message board spewing his own personal uninspired batch of sexist rhetoric. that rhetoric stops people from evaluating whatever dubious content he might otherwise be presenting.

I thought you said you are not a writer?So are you are a writer or not? You seem a little confused !

You need to read a little more closely, dear. I never stated that I am not a writer. I clearly stated--which you even QUOTED--that I do not work for ESSAY companies.

Wow--I feel sorry for the unlucky customer who pulls your ticket as a for-hire researcher.

Wake up!

Where did I ever say I was a for hire researcher?? Methinks you need to read more closely too!!

"I write for several companies . . . ."

https://essayscam.org/forum/es/student-scammed-relief-200/

Liar!

That was in May, and I did say I used to write for essay writing companies. I have never hidden that fact. I have not written for anyone in the last 4 months because I was fed up with students submitting my work as their own.

Unlike you I have nothing to hide. I have stated several times that I used to be a writer but now I mark essays, which incidently is how I came to discover that one of my essays had been submitted by a student as their own work without any alterations whatsover.

You so far have failed to disclose what writing you are paid for. I very much doubt posting on here earns you much unless you are being paid by the companies that you claim are legitimate to slag off the companies you proclaim as illegitimate?

Again, your reading and comprehension skills are atrocious. I have stated my career accomplishments many times. I am a LEGITIMATE writer with significant credits (that I will not disclose here), which has afforded me the time and opportunity to uncover many scams in the writing industry.

Try "Hooked on Phonics": time4learning.com/learning-hookedonphonics.shtml

*whistle whistle*....

essaytownsucks.org/f4-essaytown-com-sells-recycled-plagiarized-papers/t11-e ssayfraud-and-essaytown-have-bought-essayscam-org.html taken from ye' website

*whistle whisle*....


By George, you're right! I'm sorry... you did not make a logical argument, hence it would not contain any logical fallacies. I'm sure that makes sense.. in your world. :)


Hey, I thought you weren't on my side. >.< You just proved that regardless of the substance of joey 's statements, his sexist remarks barred the argumentative content of his writings from being absorbed by people who felt offended by his langauge choice. This implies that the content was disregarded rather than evaluated and deemed false which consequently means that joey's arguments couldactually be substantive and sensible when one looks beyond his ugly choice of words.

Hey, good job in posting the same, fabricated trash that your EW buddies have posted a hundred times previously. It doesn't work.

ok, this has gotten hilariously stupid. if you seriously think that a syllogism is simply a "logical argument" then that proves you're just posing by throwing out logic-related phrases that you think make you sound smart. i'm sorry you don't understand the nuances of my argument but it's not my responsibility to give you a logic lesson. if that's the same dictionary you use to write papers for your clients... well... /shiver.

um, duh? remember back on page 8...

seriously, did you just pick a debate with me for no reason whatsoever? lol. i thought you only took random pot shots at WB.

we all make moral and ethical decisions regarding the individuals we engage in conversation and debate. I'm not going to waste my time engaging in a thoughtful debate with someone using sexist rhetoric. doing so implies acceptance of that rhetoric. not to mention the fact that, as a woman, i know that he can and will simply disregard my arguments based upon my gender. my refusal to engage clearly sexist rhetoric is a far more important choice.

so... why exactly are you defending joey's rhetoric again?

If that is your attempt at humour then it is pathetic. It amuses me that whenever you are put on the spot to prove your credentials you resort to insults or attacks on those that challenge you.

I find you boring and inconsequential and do not intend to give you the satisfaction of embroiling in further argument with you. I have on several occasions challenged you to show everyone here a sample of your LEGITIMATE writing and each time you have skirted round the issue by slagging me off.

I never make claims or allegations I cannot support and am not afraid to disclose samples of my wriitng that have been published, though I doubt that you will have had the opportunity to read my disertations as they are lodged with UK universities.

Anyway at present I am too busy completing my PHD as well as working full time to pamper to your petty obsessions. As far as I am concerned this matter is closed, though I doubt you will understand the meaning of the word 'closed', so I will finish by saying that regardless of any further attacks you are about to make on me following this posting I do not intend to reply as I am finished with talking to kindergarten children!

You're the one who kept coming after ME, loser, and I shut you down EVERY TIME!

Why do you guys resort to these pathetic attacks whenever you get backed to a corner? Why not engage my arguments (or joey's & julie's for that matter) rather than ignore them and spend more time trying to insult us? Don't you get it? "Sticks and stones..." >.< We're mature enough (well, me and julie anyway... sorry joey) not to be pissed by trash talk. Apparently, we can't say the same for you and lanchaw bin. :(

It's sad how you refuse to accept that the sites you accuse as fraudulent do deliver quality orders. The bottom line of all of this is greed, your greed. Unfortunately for you, you'll stay frothing in the mouth over all the orders the we "steal" from you because we're in this industry to stay. You can kick and scream in forums like this all you want but that won't change a thing. :) You can brag about how much more you earn but that won't change the amount of money we receive in our accounts every pay period, and that won't change the fact that because of that money we are able to afford a comfortable lifestyle.

Good night. ^_^