WB: cyber-stalk anyone lately? pretending to be some sort of moral crusader in one of the most scumbag-infested industries on the planet... you're the worst offender. not only are you a horrible liar and notorious joke, but you're also a bad influence on WRT and pheelyks. when do you think they will start pretending to be women?

WRT: thanks for not editing your natural reaction: cowering, wheedling, and begging. you've given WB's boots a good spit shine. now, run along back under your rock, and don't come out again.

show and prove, pheelyks.

@bitumen
if you pick any thread at random, you'll see the same pattern of degeneration. it confounds me, too. I'm on a couple of other boards where the people are nice to each other, helpful, and, for the most part, act like adults. my guess is that the "ruling cadre" of this board is made up of a few very childish, blatantly unhelpful, negative people, who are spoiling it for everyone else.

pheelyks, your proctologist called... they found your head!

I don't think anyone is going to admit to not paying taxes, even with the thin shell of anonymity this forum provides... just a guess. also, most of these companies probably file 1099s.


horseit!


aren't you embarrassed about overusing this line yet? I read your crap about answering bitumen's question directly, and didn't believe a word of it. just because I don't believe something, doesn't mean I haven't read it. because the proof is right there: bitumen is happy with what they do, and stated so. you answered their question incorrectly, and like an unhelpful dick, as usual. you should be ashamed of yourself.

I like you, bitumen... but you are in the worst place possible. get out while you can! I had high hopes for this board when I first got here, too. it is a dark pit. not one of the unimaginable a-holes who are regulars here has learned to have any social skills with newcomers-- and they have long since turned on each other, like catfish in a scum-bucket.

if you're uncomfortable explaining yourself, I think you should get a second job, maybe part-time, and say you do that, and then, if pressed, say that you "invest here and there." remember, it's OK to keep it vague! most job talk is small talk anyway, and people aren't really paying the closest attention... but they love it when you turn around and ask them questions about what they do.


hey pheelyks-- how does your own medicine taste?

what did I say about projecting your inadequacies before? here's your proof on a silver platter, you sad sack of ****! bon appetite.

well, WB, that's a lot of insulting bluster. all I see is some cyber-stalking and way too much free time. you obviously see yourself as some sort of white knight, but you're more like Don Quixote. the essay writing industry continues to be an under-regulated, shadowy pit, and will, ad infinitum. you're right, though; I interjected-- sorry to interrupt. please go back to defending your company.

no, really... I'd like to know what this means:


because it sounds like a bunch of BS.

what the hell are you talking about, you lunatic?

yes, it's sad how proud WB is of his posts. it's also really sad that you're getting such a negative view of the US based on a couple of kooks on a message board.


keep dreaming.

+1

to review:

1. "hick" is a race-neutral term. black people and white people both use it to describe both black and white people. if you're out of touch with black people, and don't know that, it's not my problem. it is further proof of your racist blindness, that you only recognize hicks as white people, but whatever.

2. "cave-dweller from Pakistan" is a statement that reeks of racism. no one says "cave-dweller from America." people say "cave-dweller from Pakistan..." if they're disparaging Pakistanis based on mass-media-fed assumptions of groups with which they have little contact, etc. see above. if you don't understand out-group stereotyping by now, class is over. I'm sick of repeating myself for your dense ass.

3. you misspelled "dweller" twice in a row. it wasn't a typo.

while watching you squirm about these three points is fun, it really is beside the point, which is to address your preoccupation with the term "ESL" being equated with "poor quality writing..." in an industry dominated by poor quality writing of every shape, style, and color imaginable. I mean, look at FW's posts. and he's considered one of the good ones.

and now, if you don't mind, I'm going to ignore the man behind the curtain. have a nice day!

haha.

you misspelled "dweller" twice. that's not a typo. yes, that's my position. I'm sure you know how to spell it now-- good for you.

you can't defend using urbandictionary as a source. I could create my own Wikipedia page about how "hick" is a non-racial (or better, multi-racial) term, but it wouldn't make me the winner of any arguments. you seem to be confused.

as for your challenge, "Pakistani cave-dweller" is a racist term because it is based on your out-group stereotype of Pakistanis, an untrue representation coming from your diseased, racist mind that portrays the people of this nation as being culturally backwards, and living in poor conditions. Pakistan is a modern, independent country with a nuclear arsenal and a relatively high standard of living. sure, it has its hick areas, but on the whole, the average Pakistani is not a cave-dweller... anywhere but in your racist, backwards imaginary category of the group, on which you're foisting the inadequacies and shortcomings of your own group.

that's my response to your ridiculous "challenge." do you want me to repeat it a third time, or dumb it down a little?

if it were a typo, you wouldn't have repeated it twice. it must suck, thinking you're so smart, but not being able to spell a word like "dweller." that's what, 3rd grade spelling?

as for using urbandictionary as a source, lol. silly rabbit... you can't use a user-content-generated site as an empirical source. that's ridiculous. go ahead and look up hick in a reputable dictionary like the OED or Merriam-Webster, and see what it says there. PS-- they don't have 100 definitions of each word from which to pick and choose.

on the bright side, from your side, anyway, this sort of idiocy is making me doubt that you have any authority in this industry... or anywhere else. of course, dumb people sometimes make it very far... but I'm having one of those "please ignore the man behind the curtain" moments. I'm starting to feel very sorry for you.

there's nothing racist about "cave-dweller" (learn to spell) per se: for example, if I call someone who is acting stone-age a cave-dweller, it's certainly no active reflection of any out-group stereotype I have about cavemen and women, who don't exist anymore, apart from our imaginations.

however, when you say, "Pakistani cave-dweller," that's a whole different can of worms.

don't you realize that? how deluded are you?

also, I didn't call you out on "hick," because it isn't a racist term. it's classist, and regionalist, and it also represents another out-group stereotype you seem to have. but there is no connotation of race or nationality associated with it.

you should maybe know that I'm a city person, and went to some pretty good schools... just as you should know that Meo probably lives in a house or apartment, in a country that has most likely advanced rapidly to first-world standards (at least in its middle class) in the last decade, while yours has been deteriorating. correct me if I'm wrong, Meo.

as to you believing in your rightness, WB, that's the insidious thing about out-group stereotypes... you blind yourself to the facts, in favor of your preconceptions and assumptions. these assumptions are usually things that you don't like about yourself and your own group, and project outwards onto groups with which you have little contact.

I just hope you're not so ridiculously off-base in the future, when you get around to addressing your Native Speakerism, and how it informs your disparagement of ET's competition, towards whom you are often base and racist. but as to that, I'm not going to get my hopes up.

haha. as usual, I don't need to prove a thing, sir-- all I need to do is give you enough rope.

this is the most hilarious Freudian slip I have ever seen. also, you might want to learn the difference between sex and gender.


I'm a frequent poster at a few different sites, many of which are positive places. this isn't. I've adapted accordingly. that's not to say I don't like it; it's war all the time here, and that takes some getting used to. but I do like defusing your arrogant lies, sir, and I also enjoy seeing how easily you can be put on the defensive.


anyway, Meo is right. we've gone far off topic. everyone knows that WB is a man, and also that WB is a racist... and his delusions re: racism and cultural elitism, rather than his delusions re: his sex, are at the heart of this thread. sorry for going off track, Meo.

yep-- you're the one who edited your own post out of the fear that I would see through your language use, which just drew more attention to it.

speaking of which,


I've certainly heard females tell me to get the **** out before, but "pansy" is a new one.

you seriously need some acting lessons, sir.

hey-- you're the one who keeps bringing it up.


haha. I can only hope that, now that you're on guard, you'll be less unnecessarily vulgar in the future, and make this place a little brighter. in other words, dude, act like a lady.


your subjective concept of rationality is something you apply outwards without checking to see that it applies inwards, just like your mentor WB's concept of fraud.


"developed?" wtf do you expect-- this is an industry based on helping kids cheat their way through school. it's ugly because the moral high ground everyone here is scrambling to occupy doesn't exist.

I'm still waiting for that proof that saying "blow me" is all the rage among females, WB. I can only assume by your silence that you're out gathering it, leaving me here to deal with your sorry little lap-dog and his bunch of excuses.

methinks the lady doth protest too much...

• 
  blow me!
  

pheelyks, you poor twit... I really feel sorry for you. you're so attention starved... but this isn't the way. all you're going to get being a snooty jerk is negative attention. what you want is positive attention. you get that by being decent, and acting like an adult. you'll figure it out eventually, I'm sure. you're not as bad as WB yet, but I see you going down a bad road. watch whom you emulate.

I wasn't going to say anything, but now that you mention it, "edited by WritersBeware,"


this pathetic attempt at a cover-up is just begging for a comment. so, in the interest of making you a better internet transvestite, I invite you to prove your assertion, as you so often invite others to prove theirs. personally, I've hung out with a fair number of women, mostly friends of girlfriends, and I've heard it a total of once. and she was wasted, and pretending to have a pe**s.

your move, sir.

pheelyks is a pale snoot who keeps himself pasted to a screen 24-7. he's a joke who brags about how much money he makes doing kids' homework for them, picks at people's grammar because he's unintelligent, and can't get a job writing anything with his name on it. it's no wonder that he's a little bit cranky, sometimes.


we just want you to be a better, nicer person, son. but if you insist on living in this kind of glass house, you might want to scribble your little lash-outs in Word first, because it has grammar checker and all. good luck!

I think this is the quote that needs addressed; the others are slightly off-topic.

WB, are the words too big for you? is the sentence up there too long?

so, Mr. Manners... who's your publisher? Yahoo!Answers?

you're right, Meo: WB probably isn't going to read these articles. neither is anyone else, because they appear to be from password-protected, database-based, peer-reviewed journals. if you really want to confront the arrogance and ignorance of these clowns, you might try posting some quotations directly from the articles, and asking them to respond.

balls, crotch rot, castration... not very ladylike! you need some acting lessons, if you really want to pull this off.

I never said I could prove it... I just asked you to admit it. have it your way. just know this: you're the coward... and the main reason this place stinks.

well, WB, no matter what I ask, or what I say,

1. you're going to keep pretending to be a lady (have you ever heard of a lady as obsessed with using male genitalia in "her" insults as WB? because I'd like to meet her). that's OK-- it's the 21st century and all.

2. you're going to keep denying your connections to ET, about which there is no proof (as you won't admit working for them), but a lot of circumstantial evidence (see who's fastest to the rescue on any post criticizing ET).

what a farce. it's lucky for you that the average customer in this industry is as dumb as a bag of hammers, and can't see through this con-game masquerading as an objective watchdog site.

for whom do you work, if not ET? and if not in the industry, why the obsessive interest, and how the extensive knowledge?

glad you're back, WB. do you want me to repeat the question? I'm getting kind of sick of it.

here's a clue: it wasn't who don't you work for.

another dodge into insults... and this time, surprisingly, elitism. you're the last guy I'd expect to hide behind elitism, WB, given your generally lowbrow tone. so, do you need me to repeat the question?

I notice that you're not saying, "I don't work for ET;" as usual, it's just, "prove that I do."

you don't want to admit it? you think you're being cagey? that's fine. so, who do you work for?

I just want to know why your boss stopped answering.

anyway, thanks for recognizing the potential source of bias-- although I would argue that many people in South Asia speak and write in better, more nuanced English than native speakers do.

well, if you're going to butt in, then, you also might want to address the matter of pointing out "frauds" in an industry in which you're employed by the so-called frauds' competitors, and how this isn't a conflict of interest... if that's the party line to which you want to adhere.

or are you too busy poaching clueless customers who come here for advice?

speaking of reading before typing, you should read whom my last post was addressing before chirping in to try and defend your boss' indefensible position. but hey, when have you ever let that stop you, you fawning little toady kiss-ass? what an excellent replacement for WRT you make!

I'll say this one more time before you change the subject again.

it's not a matter of false accusations... it's a manner of being employed by a company in the industry in which you've set yourself up as a scam-buster, and losing both your objectivity and your credibility. please don't try to worm your way out of that untenable position with insults and off-topic challenges. address it.