Authentic American Essay Writing Companies: Does it matter?

I was taunting you, monkey. :p

Hey Julie, thanks for the input. I think WB did initially say that all companies that are really based in America who provide guarantees that they "do not hire outside the US" truly keep their word. If we are to believe what you've just said, I guess WB was lying yet again. Then again, that's something that's to be expected. :)

Let's see the PROOF, please. I always provide PROOF. Where's yours? Show me an American company that lies, and I will tear them to shreds, too!


Show PROOF of just one "lie"--ever!

I'd like some names and evidence to back this up as well. I've posted about my hiring experiences elsewhere. The companies that I continue to maintain working ties with all checked my references, checked my education level, and put me on writing probation so that I could demonstrate that I was reliable before giving me big assignments.

essaycapital.com/custom_essay.php - I told them I was from UK, they did not ask to see any of my work but asked if I was comfortable with writing law essays for US students. I lied and said I had done US bar exams and they offered me a job.

grandessays.com- takes on UK an US writers but would you trust them when they cannot even spell words correctly on their front page

UK and US writers only; we care about the quality of the reasearch papers
Flexible pricing policy; with us you receive an authentic and professionally written term paper or disseration

I told them that I was Singapore but got my degree in UK. They asked for one sample of my work so I sent them one of my worst pieces and was offered a job.

solidpapers.com- These do have UK and US writers but did not ask for proof of my certificates/ qualifications.

There are several others. Here's a challenge why not tell me which ones you think would reject me because I am in the UK or ones that wont take foreign writers and I will see if I can prove you wrong!

LOL! Two out of three of those sites are owned by the famously fraudulent Ukrainians!

Ukrainian MasterPapers.com / Academia-Research.com owns essaycapital.com.

Ukrainian BestEssays.com / EssayWriters.net owns grandessays.com.

CustomEssayMeister.com owns solidpapers.com.

Are we supposed to be surprised that they are cooked and do not abide by the hiring guidelines that they fraudulently guarantee customers? They have been doing this for YEARS in order to "compete" with the honest companies in North America that actually DO have standards.

The BestEssays.com / EssayWriters.net crooks will hire anyone with at least 7 fingers.

Ok so name some supposedly US only hiring sites and I will put them to the test. Or are you scared that I might just prove you wrong?

i think naming some sites for you to test that i consider legit would be a clear violation of this board's "no endorsements" policy. i am really not interested in naming sites that i work with and getting accused of advertising.

you have the burden of proving your claim. i would suggest that you test companies that have not already been identified as clear frauds through sites like essaysfraud.org. proving that known frauds have poor hiring policies really isn't a surprise.

As you point out though neither this site nor essay fraud name those sites that are SUPPOSEDLY legit and neither of these sites name all of the sites that are SUPPOSEDLY fraudulent. There are many sites (some of them new sites) that are not in essayfrauds lists but are SUPPOSEDLY owned by one of the FRAUDULENT sites.

In my opinion you are hiding behind the rules of advertising as an excuse to not name any of the sites you claim are legit as you cannot be 100% certain that I would not be successful in securing employment with them even though I am not a US resident.

The simple solution as I see it would be to send a private message to my email address with the sites you claim are legit and I will test them out.

julie24963, see the name of this site. It's not "EssayLegit.com." I post in order to uncover scams, not to endorse the sites that I believe engage in legitimate, honest business practices.

i don't work for any company that claims to hire only American writers. I work for companies that hire U.S./U.K./Australian writers, ie EFL writers. to my knowledge, you wouldn't be on face rejected from any of them. i don't even know of any companies that only claim to hire American writers.

the companies you describe don't even claim to only hire American writers!
essaycapital.com they only clam to hire writers with Masters and they don't specify nation of origin (unless it's elsewhere, if you can find it, please provide a link). you concede that the other two hire UK and US writers in your post.

if you want to prove that companies who claim to hire only US writers will hire anyone... maybe you should start with testing companies who actually DO claim to only hire US writers. that might be a good first step.

i have nothing to hide. your accusation that i am hiding behind forum rules is both false and rude. i do however try to respect forum rules. not doing so is just bad form. like tracking your muddy shoes in someone's house, it's the sort of thing people just shouldn't do.

So in other words you cannot name any sites whether they are based in america or UK that only employ american or UK writers and will not give work to ESL writers. How can you guarantee that those companies that ARE LEGIT as you claim, do not use mostly ESL writers for their company.

Just because they do no lie about their location does not mean that they employ high quality writers. In fact they are probably exploiting the fact the ESL writers will work for less and are making an evener huger profit for selling these essays.


Lavinia I apologise if you think I was being rude. That was not my intention and I was merely pointing out that there are very few if any companies out there that will refuse to employ a writer no matter where they are from and also that very few ask to see any proof of the qualificatios of their writers.

Test it out for yourself if you like. Pose as an ESL writer and see if any of the companies that you believe are legit would entertain you as a writer! You could also try giving yourself false qualifications to see if they check to see whether these are bona fide. I bet you would be amazed at the results.

Provide proof, or don't bother posting.

As I suspected you cannot name one site that supposedly employs US writers only and therefore cannot guarantee to anyone on here that the essays they get will be from a US writer.

Where is your proof that your legit companies do not rip off american students by using only US writers. I see no evidence of this in any of your posts and as you wont even send me a private email giving details of a site that you believe only employs US writers I can only assume that you don't know of any.

In essence this means that even those companies you state are legit because they are located in the US are not necessarily LEGIT unless you can categorically prove that they will not use non US writers to write essays for US students.

I know of several legit, U.S.-writers-only companies that have been in business since 1994-1998, many years before the Ukrainian criminals even understood the word, "term paper." I did not mention these legit companies BEFORE you arrived, and I will not mention them now.

Unlike you, I abide by this forum's guidelines. Are you TRYNG to win the "Idiot of the Year" award? How many times do multiple people have to explain to you that mentioning "legit" companies is NOT allowed here? Do you have some sort of brain damage?

"6. The EssayScam Forum is not a place for advertisements or publicity in any way."

Try reading.

And how many times have I asked you to send me a private message naming these LEGIT companies- thereby not breaking the rules of the forum as it will not be in the public domain- or did you gloss over that piece of the writing intentionally as you always do?

TRY READING


Emphasis on PRIVATE EMAIL!! Numbskull. Hey looks like you are in the running for the 'Idiot of the Year Award' yourself!!

Thank you WB for proving your ignorance of the understanding of the word END on the other posting.

CUE DRUM ROLL

And the IDIOT of the YEAR AWARD goes to.....

WB

PLease take a bow and goodnight and God bless I am off to find a more worthy opponent.

Oh and as for your 'unqualified' barrister comment I can prove my qualifications without any difficulty. As well as my certificate to practice, and membership of the bar counsel of england and wales, and membership of the honourable society of lincoln's inns, my reputation in the royal courts of justice in london and the Old Bailey also speak volumes of my experience as will my title of QC which I am heading towards at present and will attain as soon as I have completed my silks.

Before you decide to respond in future you might like to engage your brain before you put your mouth into gear! I will leave you with the quote from Alexandre Dumas which kind of sums up my opinion of you

'Rogues are preferable to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.'

Farewell!!

i addressed the issue of what writers can do to prevent themselves from becoming entangled with a fraudulent site a while back at:

https://essayscam.org/forum/wc/signs-fraudulent-legit-service-writer-perspective-297/

at the top of my list is the recommendation of only writing for companies with employment standards. a lack of hiring standards just opens the writer up to being cheated by the company later on.

i don't doubt that there are many companies with low standards of employment. i simply object to the claim that they are ALL that way.

I have yet to find a company that keeps to its claims of only employing UK or US writers which is why I made the comment that to date the companies tested ALL seem to allow anyone to write for them no matter what their qualifications. Find me one that doesn't and prove me wrong and I will concede the issue!

I have stated that I work for three companies that have clear hiring standards. I have outlined their hiring standards through the post that I linked (a post that I wrote long before you started this line of argument). they all did the following:

request resume, phone interview, check references, sign an employment contract, put me on a writing probation during which they checked all of my work before sending it to the client and limited my access to short, relatively easy jobs. only after i'd demonstrated competency did they then eventually opened up larger jobs to me.

that's three companies. that should prove you wrong.

if your response is that you don't believe me, i think that is just unreasonable and unfair considering your demand that i should believe you to be honest about checking them. either extend to me the same level of trust that you believe i should extend to you or don't trust me and don't expect the readers of this board to simply take you at your word either. you can't have it both ways.

Since when am I required to comply with your personal requests? Sorry, but your personal agenda is meaningless to me.

See ya, ignorant, thieving, unscrupulous, criminal.

You have only quoted what the sites SAY they require. Private message me these sites and I will approach them for work. If they reject me or perform the checks you claim then fait a compli I will post on here to state you are correct.

If you are so confident of the claims you assert then you should not be bothered whether I test them out or not. 'The proof of the pudding is in the eating'.

I am not being unreasonable to ask to be allowed to verify this for myself. If someone put a contract in front of me saying that if I signed it I would get £1,000,000 I would not take that at face value either. I would want to check it out for myself before I believed what I was being told.


I actually gave 3 of the sites I checked out and could have listed many more but did not want to monopolise the thread nor get accused or advertising these sites. If you would like me to private message you all the sites I went to and send you the email I sent to them and their responses I will gladly do so as I have nothing to hide.

Do you really EXPECT people to take at face value a list of the conditions you say the companies imposed on you without question. If anyone on here wishes to see the emails I sent to the various writing agencies send me a private message and I will forward these onto you so that you can see that I can back up the claims I am making.

As a barrister I would never assert a comment that I could not back up with evidence, that would be foolish.

Lavinia send me the names of these sites you are referring to by private email and I will test your hypothesis.


But you expect others to reply to your personal requests. I have no personal agenda although I have taken issue with your repeated comments to joey and others concerning them being, in your words 'chimps and dog eaters', as you may well find out through admin as I have made an official complaint.

I will post their response once they have investigated my allegation, though you might find out before me if they agree with the request I made. See you around

no, posted from my own personal experience. ie, the three sites i work for all conducted interviews, requested resumes, sent an employment contract and tested me as a writer in the short term. are you telling me that you're going to test what i'm saying by applying as a qualified writer, signing an employment contract and completing work for them in order to study their evaluation process? i find that highly unlikely.


frankly, yes i do. i posted that thread long before you started making your allegations because i wanted to help other writers gain from my experience and i was tired of reading all the "i'm a writer and i got ripped off threads." i have zero reason to lie. i never post or share who i work for so i clearly am not in any way advertising for anyone. if folks want to not believe me, then i suppose that's there call to make, but i am not going to jump through hoops to prove statements that i'd have no other reason to provide.


hmm. you still haven't provided any evidence that any company that claims to only hire Americans will hire foreigners. That was your original claim and none of the three companies that you posted about fit that description. now you want me to tell you which companies i think are OK so you can investigate them? doesn't that seem really backwards to you?

and, well... come on... you promised me 2 weeks ago to provide evidence that a significant portion of individuals use custom writing companies to cheat. remember? i said the stats were like 1-2% and i quoted academic studies... way back at...

https://essayscam.org/forum/es/accessessays-fraud-philippines-305/5/


remember that? that was on Sept. 19th. 2 weeks later, still no evidence. you're clearly not too busy to post. so will you ever be providing that evidence or did you just give up when you understood that it doesn't actually exist?


testing a hypothesis requires an unbiased researcher. i am honestly not convinced that you are. let me ask you a question, what would prevent you from receiving information about the companies that i work for and then posting to defame them publicly?

and if you did so, how would i be able to respond when the board rules clearly tie my hands on public endorsements?

i don't post to this board to defend a particular company but i am certainly not about to make one of the companies that i work for a target for criticism. and frankly i have zero interest in you or anyone else knowing who i work for b/c i want to be able to continue to speak freely without having my opinions associated with my employers. surely you can understand that.


it's posts like this that make me question your objectivity julie. joey went after WB first. lots of derogatory sexual attacks and the whole 'you're fat' stupidity. WB has answered with some nastiness but only after being provoked.

yet you complain about WB and not Joey?

that really does not appear unbiased or fair.

Actually I complained about both as they will both discover

Self-defense is not a punishable offense.

Crawl back in your hole, please.

What makes you think I was just complaining about your rudeness? I hardly think that they way you conduct yourself can be classed as self defence since you are the one that does most of the attacking.

I have no respect for you or any of your opinions as you cannot string together a whole entry on the forum without resorting to slagging someone off. You avoid answering direct questions by resorting to attempts at belittling people. With the complaint I have lodged maybe that will soon becoming to an end.

I did my homework before submitting my complaint and have presented my findings to the moderator. I have asked for a response within 14 days before my senior partner in chambers and I take further action. I do not need to nor am going to explain to you or anyone on here what the grievance is and I will let the forum administrators review the information submitted to them so they can decide what action if any they propose to take.

At present I have been advised to discontinue posting on here by my senior partner as it could effect the outcome of the proposed action. I am not at liberty to discuss this further and so for now this is the last post I will be making.

LMAO!

This is a public forum. Everything I've stated is factual. You have no case whatsoever.

The record shows that YOU attacked me first, as you have nothing better to do with your sad existence than defend the devious acts of criminals.

Good riddance.

julie, it amazes me that everytime i have pressed you for evidence to back up your arguments, you come up with a bigger excuse as to why you can't provide it.

first, the double murder that made you so busy at work, then your birthday, now this mysterious lawsuit threat that prevents you from posting. what a busy 2 weeks you've had, it's amazing that you've managed to post at all, really.

The complaint has absolutely nothing to do with the assertions you have made against the writing companies, nor is the complaint anything to do with the insults you have lobbied at me. The allegation my senior partner and I have made is of a much more serious nature and it is precisely because it is a public forum that our complaint can be elevated through the court procedure should the moderators refuse to deal with this matter.

I had hoped to persuade you to discontinue your attack on people such as Joey by asking you to treat people more respectfully, but as I failed in this quest I felt it necessary to highlight the laws being broken by this forum to my senior partner who advised me to contact the moderators to make them aware of the situation.

Until I receive instruction from the moderators as to how they propose to deal with these matters I will continue to monitor posts on here but not respond.


Lavinia it was not a DOUBLE murder it was 2 separate murders within 3 days of each other. I can give you the names of the victims and circumstances of their deaths and the names of those arrested as well as my involvement in these cases if you so wish. Oh and yes it was my birthday on the 24th Sept as stated. Would you like to see my birth certificate?

If you want Lavinia I will send the information on students found cheating in the UK to you via a private message to prove I have done my research into the numbers of students caught cheating in the UK, though I did post several links on one of my posts the other day that detailed research that has been done into the numbers of students using essay sites.

Julie, just shut the hell up already. It's my personal opinion that you are an idiot, and it is Joey who openly admitted to being a dog-eating criminal.

Any person with any sort of legal qualifications knows that one can not seek civil damages in the name of someone else. Wake up. Regardless, nothing I have stated is false or defamatory; everything that I have stated is verifiable and true.

You're boring.

i have no doubt that students in the UK cheat, neither do you. that's all the evidence that you provided said.

you said you'd provide evidence that a significant proportion of students used custom essay services to cheat. i operationally defined significant as 20% to make it easy for you to back up your claims. that's the specific evidence that you need to back up your claims that you have never provided. my empirical research evidence said 1-2% of all the students who cheat do so by using essay writing services. that's significantly less than those who cut and paste off the net and those who copy books and journals.

come on, it's been 2 weeks. you've posted many times on different threads but you've never provided that evidence - despite the murders, your birthday, and now this lawsuit. you've also now completely failed to provide any evidence that a site that claims to hire only American writers will hire foreigners.

every few days it's been a new attack and a new argumentative thread by you that attacks this industry. never evidence to support your old arguments as you just find something new to argue about.

Since when did I state I was seeking civil damages? Yet again you make your own assumptions.

I do not need to be representing any third party for the complaint that has been lodged. You are merely trying to guess as to what the complaint is about and I shall leave you to continue guessing.

Hey, Lavinia, Julie is going to sue me for hurting the feelings of a third-party criminal.


All you do is type baseless, unsubstantiated trash. As I stated previously, just shut the hell up and bring it!

IF anything happens to this forum, which i doubt, then i'll be setting up another and inviting WB to write a daily blog. heck, even EW et al would be invited to join and call me a monkey. it would be like old times. i have a free domain i'm doing nothing with anyway.

julie, your threat of a suit is close enough to blackmail to make it thoroughly distasteful. dancing about and continuing to post while refusing to actually explain the complaint is just childish.

The rule of law disallows me from publishing details of the complaint as that would prejudice the case in point. All will be revealed in due course. As stated above the moderators have been asked to respond within 14 days at the bequest of my senior partner and I will be at liberty to discuss this once the outcome of their response is known.

For your information Lavinia blackmail is defined as
' blackmail, in law, exaction of money from another by threat of exposure of criminal action or of disreputable conduct. The term was originally used for the tribute levied until the 18th cent. upon the inhabitants of the Scottish border to provide immunity from raids by Scottish bands. Statutes often treat blackmail as a form of extortion.'

As I have not attempted to exact money from anyone, including the moderators , then there is no blackmail. The action being pursued is not of a financial one and is unlikely to result in any form of remuneration.

i didn't say that your threat IS blackmail, i said that it is very close to being blackmail, so close that it's distasteful.

the fact that you felt the need to distinguish between the two proves my point.

since we're trading legal information, let me point out that, under British Law, blackmail doesn't HAVE to involve the attempt to extract money:

From Green, S. (2005) Theft by Coercion: Extortion, Blackmail and Hard Bargaining, Washburn Law Journal, vol 44, p. 557.

"A much broader use of the term "blackmail" occurs under British
law, which has no separate offense of extortion. Under Section 21 of
the U.K. Theft Act of 1968, a person is guilty of blackmail if, "with a
view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another,
he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces."10 This kind
of blackmail is broader than informational blackmail in two significant
ways: First, the "view to gain . . . or intent to cause loss" language
encompasses both demands for money and demands for something
other than money, such as that the victim give the blackmailer a job,
that the victim permit the blackmailer to take indecent photographs of
her, or that the victim destroy letters written by the blackmailer to
her.11 Second, the "any unwarranted demand with menaces" language
is-at least on its face-broad enough to encompass threats of
a very wide range of conduct, both lawful and unlawful."

Furthermore, a more narrow interpretation of blackmail even allows for the threat of a lawsuit to qualify as blackmail legally:

Green, same source:

"There is also a third, "in-between" sense of the term blackmail.
Unlike blackmail under the Theft Act, this kind of blackmail is limited
to demands for money, as opposed to other kinds of compelled conduct.
But, unlike blackmail in the narrow sense, such blackmail is not
limited to threats to expose embarrassing information; it also includes
threats to do other putatively lawful acts, such as filing a lawsuit, stag-
ing a work stoppage, or even going on a hunger strike."

hence the claim that your threat is pretty darn close to blackmail.

Furthermore, you should probably cite your source, since at the moment you are plagiarzing someone's work by not offering an appropriate citation.

I did not feel the need to distinguish I merely wished to set the record straight. Please explain how my dealings with the moderators can be deemed to be blackmail. I have highlighted a problem with the forum which I have suggested that they should deal with as they are risking legal action being brought against them if they do not address the problem. That is not blackmail, that is explaining how they are putting themselves at risk for not moderating the forum in accordance with their own rules and guidelines.

If your going to quote from the theft act include the full wording as found in Blackstone's manual (as used by the police)

Theft Act 1968 s21 , a person is guilty of blackmail if, with a
view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another,
he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief -

(a) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demands; and
(b) that the use of the menaces is a proper means of reiforcing the demand.

s34(2) Theft Act 1968 defines gain or intent to cause loss as temporary or permanent, in money or other property.

Menaces as described by Blackstones p356

Words or conduct which would not intimidate or influence anyone to respond to the demand would not be menaces... but threats and conduct of such nature and extent that the mind of the ordinary person of normal stability and courage might be influenced or made apprehensive so as to accede unwillingly to the demand would be sufficient for a jury's consideration.

I have not made any THREATS or MENACES to the moderators, and since you do not know the content of the communication sent to them you are not in a position to be able to make such an assertion.

My first definition of blackmail was taken from an online dictionary, the above is taken directly from Blackstone's, which is kind of the barristers bible along with Archbold which is also extensively used.

When it comes to criminal law I can run rings round you as I live, eat, sleep and breath the stuff night and day so challenging me on legal definitions is futile.

is your only defense to the blackmail comparison that you didn't make a threat? really?



remember this?


so what further action is it? to send the mod a goody basket? i doubt it.
you've admitted to everyone reading this that you threatened the mod.


do you let your students cite like that? truly horrible, pretty much still bordering on plagiarism.

so where is that evidence about the legion of students using custom essays to cheat?

and the evidence of American companies hiring anyone from anywhere?

Of course I would never allow a citation to be presented in this manner. Get real! I was writing a post on a forum not writing a masters disertation. If you would really like the full citation it is as folows Murphy, P, Blackstone's Criminal Practice, 2007, Oxford. How does that grab you?


The moderators are well aware of the proposed action. In any form of legal action the protocol that has to be followed is to highlight to the party concerned the claim against them in order to allow their response. 14 days is a standard response time after which it is taken as granted that the person or persons do not wish to respond. It is then up to the person bringing the action to escalate the claim to the next level. That is how a lawsuit of any kind or description works. That is not MAKING threats that is giving the respondent the opportunity to put things right before court action is taken. I guess your one of those people who when you have failed to pay your bills and the company yhreatens legal action against you to recover the amount owing would consider you were being threatened. Live in the real world! If you do something wrong you expect to be punished. The moderators and administrators of this site have a duty to ensure they adhere to the way their forum is used. Failure to do this could mean that they could face civil or criminal proceedings against themselves.

Are you suggesting that every time a solicitor or barrister sends out a letter before action they are guilty of blackmail and threats? That's an interesting theory and one you would have difficulty proving anywhere!

I refuse to continue with this discussion any further as the actions taken by my colleague and I are legitimate and legal and I resent the accusation that my actions are unlawful, that my dear Lavinia is bordering on defamation.

Sober up!

wow, you finally cited your sources. it only took 2 posts to do so. so the lesson we can all learn from you is that it's ok to plagiarize on a forum, just not elsewhere. it's amazing how adept you are at rewriting ethical rules to suit you.


that is defamation, hypocrit. i am quite adept at paying my bills, no need to concern yourself.

anyone with a 2nd grade education can read that i didn't accuse you of blackmail. maybe you just have an aversion to the word? if you don't like the word "blackmail" then how about criminal coercion?

from my dear friend Green once again:

"As defined in theModel Penal Code, the offense of criminal coercion consists of "unlawfully . . . restrict[ing] another's freedom of action to his detriment"

by threatening to: (1) commit a criminal offense; (2) "accuse anyone
of a criminal offense"; (3) "expose any secret tending to subject any
person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to impair his credit or business
repute"; or (4) "take or withhold action as an official, or cause an
official to take or withhold action."14 Criminal coercion is thus distinguishable
from extortion and from blackmail (at least in the narrow,
informational sense of the term) in two important ways. First, as
noted, it does not involve obtaining any property from the victim.
Second, it can involve threats to engage in either lawful or unlawful
conduct, so long as it is intended to be detrimental to the victim."


at this point, i'm almost hoping this site decides to close. i'd love the opportunity to provide a forum for discussion and deal with your THREATS personally.

you had better brush up on your section 230 law. i'd suggest starting with Barrett v. Rosenthal. You know, it's the State of California Supreme Court 2006 unanimous decision that ruled that internet users can't be held accountable for defamatory statements made by others on their websites. the decision further stated that holding internet users who do not originate the defamatory speech liable for defamation would in effect chill free online speech. now, i'm no expert on UK law, but here in the US, free speech is actually pretty darn important. go figure.

your threat that the mod isn't doing his/her job is meaningless and hollow. you don't have a legal leg to stand on. my guess is that the mod of this site is laughing at you. but if not, rest assured, there are plenty of others of us who are.

I just did not see the need on a forum to quote citations as one would do in an essay.


Oops I said WHEN instead of IF. This is not defamation as I have NOT accused you of NOT paying your bills.


In English law there is no crime of criminal coercion.

As defined in theModel Penal Code, the offense of criminal coercion consists of "unlawfully . . . restrict[ing] another's freedom of action to his detriment"

by threatening to: (1) commit a criminal offense; (2) "accuse anyone
of a criminal offense"; (3) "expose any secret tending to subject any
person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to impair his credit or business
repute"; or (4) "take or withhold action as an official, or cause an
official to take or withhold action."14 Criminal coercion is thus distinguishable
from extortion and from blackmail (at least in the narrow,
informational sense of the term) in two important ways. First, as
noted, it does not involve obtaining any property from the victim.
Second, it can involve threats to engage in either lawful or unlawful
conduct, so long as it is intended to be detrimental to the victim."[/quote]

By the very definition of the above it could be argued that bringing a law suit against anyone would be classed as criminal coercion and given that the US is one of the main countries were people take out law suits for the most trivial of faults I suspect the definition is much narrower then you are intrepreting it. When any law suit is issued it is by definition a warning to the other party that legal action may ensue. This is NEVER interpreted in law as THREATS and could NEVER be so interpreted as it would mean that the lawyers etc would NEVER be able to bring a law suit against someone.

Threats are interpreted in all law enforcement as actions causing the person to fear for their safety not fear that court action might be taken against them . If your assertion were correct that would mean that all criminals could bring an action against the police for threatening to arrest them if they don't discontinue with their behaviour. Get real!

As for your citation with regard to Barrett v Rosenthal 40 Cal.4th 33, 146 P.3d 510, 51 Cal.Rptr.3d 55 (Cal. Sup. Ct., Nov. 20, 2006) this only applies if the provider of the service has not been given notice of the defamatory comments. Where the provider has received such notice and continues to allow such comments they can have action taken against them

Under the common law, "distributors" like newspaper vendors and
book sellers are liable only if they had notice of a defamatory statement in their
merchandise. - taken direct from the ruling in this case eff.org/legal/cases/Barrett_v_Rosenthal/ruling.pdf

Besides that the action that is being taken is not concerned with defamation anyway so try again!