Authentic American Essay Writing Companies: Does it matter?

my goodness, how many times are you going to say you're done posting and then post anyway? i'm starting to not believe you.


and all those students in the UK don't see the need to quote citations in their essays.


good job reading only the first page of the ruling. something you would have read if you had made it to the second page:

"We further hold that section 230(c)(1) immunizes individual "users" of interactive computer services, and that no practical or principled distinction can be drawn between active and passive use."

"By declaring that no "user" may be treated as a "publisher" of third party content, Congress has comprehensively immunized republication by individual Internet users."


That's either a blatant lie or you didn't actually read the case. Either way, that is factually false as an integral component of the complaint was that Rosenthal was warned and refused to remove the offensive material (further from the case):

"They alleged that Rosenthal republished various messages even after Dr.
Barrett warned her they contained false and defamatory information."

Furthermore, notice does not confer liability because that would destroy free speech on the net. From Barrett v. Rosenthal again:

"Similarly, notice-based liability would deter service providers from
regulating the dissemination of offensive material over their own services. Any
efforts by a service provider to investigate and screen material posted on its
service would only lead to notice of potentially defamatory material more
frequently and thereby create a stronger basis for liability. Instead of subjecting
themselves to further possible lawsuits, service providers would likely eschew any
attempts at self-regulation.
"More generally, notice-based liability for interactive computer service
providers would provide third parties with a no-cost means to create the basis for
future lawsuits. Whenever one was displeased with the speech of another party
conducted over an interactive computer service, the offended party could simply
'notify' the relevant service provider, claiming the information to be legally
defamatory. . . . Because the probable effects of distributor liability on the vigor
of Internet speech and on service provider self-regulation are directly contrary to §
230's statutory purposes, we will not assume that Congress intended to leave
liability upon notice intact." (Zeran, supra, 129 F.3d at p. 333.)

Now, I realize that your a big time barrister and all, but I'll rely on a state supreme court's interpretation of law before i rely on yours. that's just a judgement call.


exactly why i criticized you in the first place. your actions are distasteful. if you truly felt that you had an actionable complaint, the classy thing to do would have been to take it up with the mod privately. instead, you post all over this forum about it even while claiming that your senior partner wants you to stop posting:


oh, and since you hinted at negligence, section 230 has also been used to protect against that too.

I have taken it up with the moderator privately which is why I haven't posted the details of the complaint. I merely pointed out that due to the impending action I could comment no further on various issues on here.

As for it being my last posting I am not going to stand idly by whilst you attempt to belittle me to try and win points.

I do not claim to be a expert on American or Canadian law but as the case to which you are referring is of no significance in this particular case there was no need for me to read any further into the decision of the court.

As the action would be brought in the UK regardless of the location of the forum or the moderators any action would be subject to English law. Court actions are brought in the jurisdiction of the applicant which in this case would be me, so the forum would have to defend under English law and could not rely on American statutes or Canadian Penal code as it would not be applicable.

Anyway this as far as I am concerned is the end of the matter though no doubt you will continue as WB usually does in making comments in the hope of provoking further comment so that you can then have a go for me responding.

On this occasion I refuse to rise to the bait but would caution you against any comments that might be read as defamatory as I would have no compulsion in including you in the same suit.

ok, this is cool too and deserves its own post. right at the very end of the ruling if you want to skip to the end:

"As Rosenthal points out, the congressional purpose of fostering free speech
on the Internet supports the extension of section 230 immunity to active individual
"users." It is they who provide much of the "diversity of political discourse," the
pursuit of "opportunities for cultural development," and the exploration of
"myriad avenues for intellectual activity" that the statute was meant to protect.
(§ 230(a)(3).) The approach taken by the Batzel dissent would tend to chill the
free exercise of Internet expression, and could frustrate the goal of providing an
incentive for self-regulation. A user who removed some offensive content might
face liability for "actively selecting" the remaining material. Users in this
position, no less than the service providers discussed by the Zeran court, would be
motivated to delete marginally offensive material, restricting the scope of online
discussion. Some users, at least those like Rosenthal who engage in high-volume
Internet posting, might be discouraged from screening third party content.
Although individual users may face the threat of liability less frequently than
institutional service providers, their lack of comparable financial and legal
resources makes that threat no less intimidating."

If julie's interpretation of the case was correct (it's not but let's pretend that it hypothetically was), and the mod made changes to the content of some posts on this forum b/c of julie's complaint, then the person who wrote the posts could file a legal complaint for the action.

so WB, if your posts are the target of Julie's proposed corrective action, as they likely are given her posts, you would actually have a legal complaint against any censoring of your posts. yay free speech on the internet.


you had zero reason to post that the complaint had been filed. zero. zip. nada. none. you posted the information as a means of attacking WB and attempting to silence her dissent. the posts are there. there is nothing illegal about my criticizing that distasteful act.

so where is the promised evidence for 20% or more of all customers using their custom essays to cheat?

where is the promised evidence that companies reporting to only hire American workers will hire anyone?

2 weeks is plenty of time to find the evidence and post it. would you like me to quote again your PROMISE to provide the evidence?


you really think that the U.S. just gives up its citizens to any frivolous foreign case?

wait i need a moment... lol


your THREATS do not get to silence my free speech, bully.

Everyone, Julie24963 claims that the "action" does not involve defamation, and then, only two posts later, she contradicts herself:

Julie24963, given this evidence, you are a liar, and what little credibility you had is shot.

By the way--defamation does not exist if the statements that you happen to find offensive are TRUE and FACT-BASED. If I provide evidence that proves you to be a liar (as I have done above), do you really think that the law would support your belief that I have no right to refer to you as a "liar"? Think again. The evidence speaks for itself.

there are other problems with the defamation accusation.

like the fact that "julie24963" isn't an identity that can be defamed. no one knows who that is.

the second being "fair comment." julie chose to introduce the subject of her complaint into the public realm by posting about her communications to the mod. so i get to offer my opinion on subjects that she chose to present in the public sphere. my comment that i believe julie's posts to be distasteful is no different from julie's posts claiming others are rude. that's not defamation, it's opinion and it's legal, even in the UK.

while i realize that British defamanation law does favor the plaintiff, to try to accuse me of that is just a wee bit of a stretch.

ok just to respond to WB' accusation that I lied... the threat of defamation was against Lavinia not against the moderator. it is possible to bring 2 separate law suits arising from the same series of events.

Why don't you contact the moderator yourself if you are so interested in the complaint that was made though I doubt that they would discuss it with you either.

I was not accusing Lavinia of defamation I was stating that she should be careful of posts that might defame the person they are aimed at.

Anyway I have had more fun watching paint dry then trying to explain the law to those with limited intelligence such as you are displaying. I have no need to explain myself any further and am leaving all future dealings on this issue with my colleague as it is he who is bringing the action on his own behest.

sweet, we all agree that you did threaten me. and just for the record, the PUBLIC PROMISE:

still no promised evidence to support the claim that all patrons of the industry are cheating cheaters. still no promised evidence to support the claim that American companies claiming to hire only American writers will actually hire foreigners. we know what it means when we break a promise, right?


promise? you won't post again? like, really? not like... well you know...

LOL!

Hey, you know what they say about 9 times being a charm . . . .


Riiiiiiight. What threads are YOU reading? Any objective person who reads these posts will surely recognize that you have been severely outclassed in every possible way by both Lavinia and me.

You attack me for being "rude" to the self-proclaimed dog-eater and crook, Joey, despite the fact that the EVIDENCE proves that Joey attacked me first with unspeakable vulgarities.

You provide zero evidence to support your claims.

You make blanket statements about students' lack of integrity.

You make repeated promises to never post again, yet you return each time.

You threaten people with "legal action" when they prove you to be a liar.

You start referring to people as "stupid" when you have no other way out of a losing argument.

You threaten to legally harm a site that fights crime and fraud, instead of investing your time and effort in fighting the criminals and frauds.

-----------------

I promise that this will NOT be my last post.

Do people really mind ESL writers writing their essays?

^___^

Would 100% of customers "mind" if they were to find out in advance that you plan to purposely DECEIVE them about your credentials? YES.

Sez who? ^_^ You? Right.. I forgot how you're the epitome of credibility.. :D

Where's your proof that my claims are false? PROVE it, or STFU.

lol... are you serious? ok, let's take a poll... who likes being lied to? show of hands?

*crickets*

EW_writer, following is what your fraudulent employer from Ukraine, essaywriters.net, now has the hypocritical audacity to claim about other foreign sites on the bestessays.com home page:

"They don't use native English speakers!
Nowadays many essay writing companies are either from Asian or African countries or just outsource writers from there. They can pay dirt-cheap wages and thus, they can lower their prices to $9-10 a page or even lower to attract more customers. Don't be fooled! Their papers are written by Filipinos, Pakistanis, Indians, and Nigerian, who can (somewhat) speak English. That's why you should think twice before ordering from the cheapest providers! The quality will be the cheapest too!"

Ironically (LMAO), aside from the humorously broken English, this is the same message that originated in 2005 from EssayFraud--ABOUT sites like essay writers and best essays! You and other essay writers henchmen try to discredit Essay Fraud publicly, yet you hypocritically espouse the same message as Essay Fraud while wearing sheep's clothing to purposely deceive customers at best essays. You people are the lowest of the low!

1. How do you justify bestessays's blatant hypocrisy about other foreign companies hiring ESL writers, considering that the vast majority of essaywriters's writers are Filipino, Pakistani, Indian, Nigerian, etc.?

2. How do you justify bestessays's blatant misrepresentation of their national origin and qualifications to customers?

3. How do you justify bestessays's bold-faced lie to customers about employing "over 1,000 American-only writers with MA and PhD degrees"?

P.S.: Hurry up and tell everyone that I am not credible, and don't forget to forget the proof again!

The notorious crook and essay writers henchman, EW_writer, is trying to publicly avoid yet another, embarrassing defeat by claiming that he can't respond to my Post #108 because, in his devious words, "it's too long."

LMAO!

What a filthy crook!

if we put that to a vote, i think most all customers would agree with writersbeware. forget about the customers, the law `minds'

Yeah, this is silly. The whole point was that a) it's all about the consumer being informed and b) the fact that the Americanness/Britishness of companies is used as a metric of their quality. It's a guess.

I would have to say yes. Mostly because the writer must be familiar with the cultures, norms, social issues, public points of view, and talking syntax / writing syntax of the country the student is located in. That will help the student get a better grade because the writer will know exactly what he is expected to produce in the final paper.


That would depend. Is the student ENL or ESL? An ENL student should not hire an ESL writer due to speech problems related to writing. Only an ESL student might gain some full benefits from hiring an ESL writer since the language pattern will be similar in some aspects.

Yes, it matters. There are specific differences between the UK and US academic research and writing styles. A writer from the US will not be conscious of the minute differences to the UK writing style that could very well alter the grading process for the paper, and vice-versa. The source of information for the research may also be more difficult for the UK writer to come by when developing a US based academic paper. While libraries and the internet can help with this, there are still differences in sources that may not be acceptable to the overseas professor. The sentence structures and colloquialisms will also play a significant role in the way the professor assesses the paper. It may give away the fact that the student hired a writer to complete his paper.

More than half of my clients request UK English. Some of us US writers have absolutely no problem writing UK English (and vice-versa). However, I have to tell you that there's no difference, in sentence structure, whatsoever, between US and UK English. The only differences are in some vocabulary, spelling, and idiomatic expression, all of which can be learned easily by any good writer. There are no differences in source requirements, either: whether they're US or UK projects, they usually just specify a citation style and the types of sources that are required. For example, "MLA or OSCOLA style and only primary sources and peer-reviewed journals no older than 2016" is the same regardless of whether it's a US or UK project. In most cases, UK and US materials are equally easy to find online if you know what you're doing; and in situations where specialized materials are required, we just rely on our clients to provide them.