threatening a customer or not

That's okay, Meo. I'll try to explain it to you in simpler English. gather the goats, and read it aloud to them for practice. repeat where necessary.

Pheelyks is hired by students to do their homework. that's his job. if a customer doesn't like they way he does his job, the customer has rights. one of those rights is the right to a refund, if the product is of poor quality, is different than Pheelyks described it, or isn't fit for the customer's purposes. Pheelyks is not the judge of this; the customer is. essentially, Pheelyks' job is to make his customers happy. a customer clamoring for a refund, while annoying, is not, as Pheelyks claims, tantamount to an extortionist. that customer is in fact very much entitled to their refund.

instead of making his customers happy, Pheelyks has admitted to turning a customer's personal information (just one, though, right Pheelyks? haha) to their university, thus quite literally ruining this person's life. for what? for having the audacity to demand a refund that's legally theirs.

and although Pheelyks is obviously proud of his actions, and is acting like a sissy-boy about "protecting himself," he is actually setting a really crappy precedent. see, Meo, Pheelyks has crossed a line. his reporting that customer was not just unethical, but also dangerous. eventually, he's either going to be caught doing this by a company he works for (companies know that sometimes you have to eat a refund or two), or he's going to get a client who doesn't care about his/her reputation, and wind up in court (where he'll probably accuse the judge of being judgmental). although that latter is unlikely, and Pheelyks seems very smug, think about it. if your life is ruined, what do you have to lose?

Here is where you are just plain old wrong. If there is a dispute about any of the points you mentioned, there are legal systems in place whereby objective third parties (judges or mediators) decide whether or not a contract has been fulfilled. The customer doesn't get to demand a refund from the guy that remodeled their bathroom just because they say the bathroom doesn't match the description, and frankly even if there were some departures the customer wouldn't be entitled to a full refund, but only to a refund of the portion of the work they had to have redone elsewhere.

None of this is applicable to the situation at hand, because the customer LIED about what he found wrong with the paper, using only FALSE QUOTES as "evidence" of poor quality. Your major problem is with learning facts before making decisions. You also have a problem with legal theory, but I'd work on the reading comprehension first.


That isn't what I've claimed at all. What I've said is extortion is a customer admitting to lying about me and my work and saying that he will stop lying about me if I give him a refund. Do you really not comprehend the difference?


I have never had an order that I completed refunded by a company.


That would be great, if only to prove how little you know about contract law.

lol... careful what you wish for.

sounds like you had a real case. the judge would have probably sided with you, sure. but you didn't go there, did you? instead, you squealed like a little pig.

No, I just actually know what I'm talking about.


So....you admit that everything you said about contract law was bulls-i*?


How would I sue the customer? A defamation suit requires actually damages, in most cases, and certainly wouldn't be worth the time. Had he taken it to court I certainly would have showed up, but this isn't a case where I would have been able to bring civil action--I already had the agreed-upon fee for the contract.

What's it like to live in a cloud of perpetual confusion?

Contract is to deliver sound and of free plagiarism essay. You deliver piece of crap. Client has right of complaining. Client is the judge, not you. Client dont like crap, he dont pay.

I never "backed" anyone. I found out about the dispute with FW, et al, when everyone else did.


"Racist" bastard!

And I did. The only "evidence' the customer had otherwise were outright lies, which he acknowledged in an email posted on this very forum.

1. The product was not of poor quality.

2. The product was not "not as described."

3. The customer does not get to dictate the "purpose." It is example research material-period.

4. You're a clueless ****.

you crossed the line, Pigsy. karma's a *****.

oh, and WB, thanks for your two cents, you angry know-it-all... it's worth about as much.

Oooooh! I "crossed the line"! Not the legal line, which you finally acknowledged, but some other imaginary scary line that means I'm in for it--whatever "it" might be! Buford, let your condemnation rain down!

the line is between serving the customer, and actively trying to ruin them. happy trails.

Good thing I didn't do that, then. Instead I sent a single email with the purpose of stopping someone from continuing to attempt to extort me, and I succeeded.

Still no comment on the fact that you were flat-out wrong on the facts and the law in this case?

so you didn't just call the school directly-- you did threaten the customer. thanks for clearing that up.

No, I emailed them directly.


No. I told the customer what I was going to do, regardless of any further conditions or actions on his part, and then did it. How many times do we need to go over this?

well, turd, you really went above and beyond. you've found a passive-aggressive, ultimately self-defeating solution to a problem any ethical writer or company would have dealt with by issuing a partial refund and moving on. congrats again. you really do go out of your way to be an unhelpful dick.

and so, I'd like to thank the mod for turning this into a thread. unfortunately, as I mentioned, I don't have a lot of faith in the search-function literacy of the fools who stray here to be poached by slumming ET writers.

No, it was pretty much just aggressive.


How's that? Do I appear defeated? Or are you referring to the vague threat of we-don't-know what that will supposedly arise as a result of my actions?


Any ethical company or writer would have issues a partial refund to stop a liar from lying about the product they produced? It's ethical to give in to extortion? What strange ethical playbook are you working from?


Again, it was one email. All told, it took less than five minutes.

You have a lot of nerve calling out anyone for anything, considering your practice of taking money from people in advance and INTENTIONALLY not delivering any product or service as part of a premeditated scam operation. Do you remember divulging that information?

there's a big difference between being a thief and being a rat.

and while you're acting self-righteous, WB, what do you think of the practice of outing customers to their universities? not exactly company policy, is it? or is it?

You managed to be both, if you did what WB says you did (your lack of denial is rather telling). You seem to be implying that you are merely a thief whereas I am a "rat" for acting in the only way I could to protect my interests, and that somehow just flat out lying to customers and taking their money is better than being honest. Your logic is amusing and disturbing by turns.

you're a rat and a squealer. the fact that I used to be a thief is just another of WBS's red herrings. whatever ethics exist in this industry come down to the fact that the writer is there to help the customer... not ruin them.

How so?


Again, how so?


This might not be entirely relevant to the ethicality of my actions, but it has everything to do with your reliability as a voice of ethical reason. You have already acknowledged outright lying on this forum on numerous occasions, you repeatedly ignore facts in order to draw conclusions that suit your own purposes, and now in turns out you actually took people's money without any intention of performing work for them at all. For you to condemn anyone else here is just laughable.

Pheelyks already clearly explained the unique and rare circumstances created by a malicious customer that made his actions necessary, but you are too hell-bent on continuing your baseless propaganda to accept reality.

One time only, in my experience.

trust me, it's a slippery slope. good luck.

oh, and thanks for going on record with your tacit approval of Pheelyks squealing to a university on his own customer, WB. I guess you won't mind if he starts going after ET customers... depending on the circumstances. right?

"I was an outright thief, therefore I'm going to assume everyone else would be if given the chance and I'm going to be all self-righteously judgmental, too." What a crock of s-i*.


First, the companies I work for are not in a position to break the law by purchasing my work, which was and is the primary issue that drove me to contact the school--as explained numerous times.

Second, when I work through a company, my contract is with that company. If the customer tries to evade paying the company or to extort a refund from the company, that is the company's business. If the company were ever to withhold pay for work I completed (this has never happened to me since I stopped working for UVO), the company would have no claim to the work I produced and I would simply publish it on my own (i.e. post it to some key websites, as I did with the UVO essays that went unpaid). If the company were libeling me somehow, and using this as an attempt to extort money from me, I would file suit if I felt I was being damaged.

Um, I really don't give a s-i* what he does with ET customers. For the record, though, freelance writers have no reason or cause to in any way "go after" the customers of a company because the company eats any losses if a customer does something underhanded, not the writer. You're welcome for the education.

WB's red herring stinks, as I've noted. I'm not going to respond to any moralist tangents it inspires.

as for what you do with companies, of course I'm not suggesting you'd attempt to squeal on them-- what put that thought in your head, I have no idea. maybe you're squeal-happy.

what I was suggesting is based on the next ET customer who rubs you wrong. if, by chance, you get their info (a database password from an email, tmi in an order description, etc.)... well, who knows?

and that's right, WB, the company eats the loss-- as it should, and as Pheelyks should have.

The fact that you refuse to draw a delineation between being "rubbed wrong" and being libeled and extorted is baffling.

sure, whatever you want to call it. you squealed. that you've justified it just makes it more likely you'll do it again.

The moron is confused - if he peddle private client he want to still treat him like company client if there's a problem. He forget peddling the private client he act like the company.

It's not what I want to call it. It's what the customer admitted to doing. Have you ever even tried to read the thread?


What?

of course I read the thread, you rat. you informant. you tattle-tale p. I'm sorry I did, too; your BS excuses make me sick.

That's what you post, by default, almost every time somebody pummels you in a debate.

Oh. So you've just been completely ignoring the facts, rather than remaining ignorant of the. That's.....good?

haha. a red herring within a red herring. what do you think, two wrongs make a right?


fact: you squealed on a client to their university. there is no excuse. there is no justification.


you twee, sarcastic, barely-literate tub of lard. I understand that logic takes a while to sink through that blubber around your occiput. no matter how much of a contradictory pain in the ass your customer was, they were entitled to what any company would have given them... not to be stabbed in the back and ruined by a vindictive, trifling, rogue idiot. I hope you get that, eventually.

You pick odd times to impose a moral absolutism.


This is what I mean about ignoring facts. Lying about work completed, bragging publicly about breaking the law, and sending a private email saying "I'll stop lying about you and trying to get you in trouble if you give me a refund for the work I have already used" would not have entitled him to anything, from anyone.

I think the fact that the only way you know how to deal with me is calling me fat is pretty pathetic. You're an acknowledged thief and liar, with the morals of a toad. I eat too much and exercise too little. If you really want to make this a war of personal bad habits, you're still going to lose.

a company would have sent this customer on their way with a partial refund, just to get rid of them. in the extreme, or to make an example, they maybe would have sent the customer a few letters from a lawyer... at worst. a company would not have gone ape-s-i*, informed on them to their university, and ruined their life. you've set a precedent as an irresponsible loose cannon, and what's really annoying is that you seem to feel entitled about it. I feel sorry for you, as well as anyone who has to read your thick-headed posts.

That's a very broad conclusion to draw. Some companies might decide to do this, it's true. I, as an individual and as a company owner, would not want to encourage libel and extortion by giving customers who engage in these actions a single dime. You also have no evidence that this is what companies would do--you're making assumptions based on your own lack of morality and your preference for weaseling out of things without actually dealing with them.


Please define.


There's an exaggeration if I ever heard one.


I've set a precedent as someone who will protect his interests by distancing himself from those that use his work to brak the law and then publicly brag about it, and as someone who does not take extortion or libel sitting down. Had other avenues for addressing any of these issues been open to me without giving into the customer's criminal efforts, I would have taken them. Suing someone/pressing charges on someone who lives in India is pretty difficult for a small fry like me, though, so I used the only means at my disposal.


Yes. I feel fully justified in taking the actions I took. I wouldn't have taken them otherwise. You might be in the habit of doing thing you don't feel entitled to do on a regular basis; I actually try to live by my principles.


Clearly all of the really trusted members of this forum--stu4, Melissa in all her forms, etc.--agree with you when it comes to the quality of my posts. I feel sorry for you and the company you keep

what are you, a parrot? stop using WB's logical fallacy to attempt to defend your indefensible action of ratting out a client to their university, you stupid ass. and enjoy your slide... if this really is the first client you've squealed on.

Where did I do this? Stop making up arguments that aren't there, and start actually responding to facts.

1) You made up a bunch of legal bulls-i*, argued about that for a day or two, then admitted you were completely wrong and just making things up

2) You keep saying I "threatened" the customer when I did no such thing, and you keep saying the customer was entitled to a partial refund because he was willing to lie about the work he received in an explicit attempt to get free work--work that he liked well enough to turn in as his own

3) You call me things like "stupid" and "immature," yet continue to make derogatory comments about my weight as though this somehow increases your own respectability and appearance of intelligence here

A response to any of these points would be most agreeable. I've explained myself extensively here--your turn.