Hello James,
Thank you for your reply. I am sorry if my concerns were negatively viewed in any respect. But the way I see it, a honest and reliable company can only be strengthened under scrutiny. Even then I have attempted to validate the company's position in many of the issues I raised. I did not have any intention to defame the company since the questions I put forward were highly appropriate. And I am glad to say that you answered them quite aptly. Still I would like to extend my case a bit although not in any offensive stance.

Concerning the multiple of 250 words as representing pages ordered, you are right as recalling from my own academic history that I worded papers in multiples of 250 words as that was the prof's demand. Still there were equal number of instances when the prof. demanded pages as a whole, disregarding the number of words. In those cases, multiples of 300 would be better fitting to the prof's expectations. At the same time, almost all writing companies' web sites I have studied state a page to quantify 300 words. But that being said, your reasons for 250 words per page are equally justified.

Your reasons for the grading scheme provided during ordering is also viable. I was inclined that there could be a reason behind it and thus had withheld from making a judgment call concerning that matter.

The "instalments" wording was a big issue with me but your reply relieves my concerns. Although the sentence structuring - especially with the comma placements - in the paragraph I quoted above does look a bit weak. But it may still fall within acceptable boundaries and may even be an instance of British grammar. Regardless, that matter in my sight is resolved.

Now, you wrote in your initial reply that "our Writer Policy Guide explicitly states the percentage the writer gets off each order." As you can see, I had highlighted a typical case where a two page essay had 3 days of deadline. There the company makes $90. Now, what would you saw is the maximum percentage of this amount that the writer with that project in hand can possibly make? I was on WriterBeware's website(hope you know what I am hinting of) and they charge a maximum of $39 per page. Curiously, they also pay $21 per page as a maximum to their writers. Thus their policy can be generalized to indicate that the writer makes about 50% of the total price. Although I personally believe that this is still less since it is only the writer that does the actual heavy lifting and the company only provides a platform and acts as an intermediary. However I do not take much offense with this system as we live in a capitalistic world where greed is the driving factor - much more so than BP's oil. Regardless, coming back to my point, I would like to reiterate the question I posted earlier. So in the case I highlighted, would the writer be able to make $45 for the two pages which would be 50% of the total price quoted to the customer? And if your answer is yes then is not it still true that the system of project acquisition is most likely bid-based(I could be wrong here) and there will be large number of writers who consider it a jackpot to get that paper at $10 per page. And the qualified but expecting guy would end up having to compromise or walk away. I am saying all this because Dissertation Network itself has indicated that their costliness is due to them having hired absolutely top notch writers. This is what is stated in their own words on the "Price Quote" page:

Where you to seek legal consul or a medical opinion, you will pay up to $500 for the first and up to $200 for a quick, 15 minute check-up. Were you, as a student, to seek the help of a private tutor, you would be charged as much as $125 per 45 minutes. Bearing that in mind, do you really believe that we can have professionals and specialists working on your orders if they are not paid that which they are worth? We are not expensive and, indeed, for the quality we provide, our services are realistically priced. We know that there are many who charge $10-20 for college and university level assignments and we cannot, and never will, beat their prices. Do you know why? Because we do not hire students as writers and we do not assign any other than professional academic researchers to your orders. We have a certain standard to maintain and few in this industry can afford to have CNN reports such as this one, done on them. We provide you with professional help and professionals do not come cheap.

So as you see, the primary reason for the expense is stated to be the writers. And it is only logical and moral that the writers who are cited as the cause do get their due respect. It would be appalling if the writers are held to be the reason for the large expense and then they are soothed by being compensated with $5-$7 more than your competitors. So again, would you say that a writer will be paid around 50% of the price without struggling with low bidding Third World writers - no disrespect intended? It does not have to be necessarily as much but I have used that to make a point. But do reply with a solid and straightforward answer as you have done previously. Thanks.

They will take the full price from you regardless but will surely devastate the writer with penalties. So its a win-win for them.

I don't understand their motivation. They already take a big commission out and then they go for the writer's earnings which are just peanuts. They end up loosing the good writer for the peanuts. I guess its like you cannot teach an old dog new tricks.

When I say "peanuts", I mean relative to the overall charge they place on the customer. Thus $15/page paid to the writer qualifies as peanuts if that same page cost the customer $35 which is not so uncommon.

And I have been familiar with other real life industries where I know how much the commission is taken by the intermediary companies. For example, I know health industry middlemen who have large offices in metro cities, they sponsor health workers from all over the world, bring them to the U.S. paying for their flight, also paying for lawyers to file appropriate paperwork, then place them at place of employment. After doing all these, the sponsored employee is contractually obligated to pay them approximately 1/4th to 1/3rd at the most from their hourly wage. I assure you that they pay more taxes, carry far more overhead, and quality control in terms of employee mistake cannot be beat in the health industry.

And this is true in other industries whether you want a middleman to reserve a plane ticket, renew your passport, or even in the real estate market where the agents charge 2%-4% commission.

And what exactly qualifies as overhead in the essay industry. When you say admin staff you mean taking orders from the customers and putting them up for bidding by the writers? This is frequently automated.Management probably cannot get tougher than having to press a few buttons to send payments to the writers on the due dates. This can be tough of course as there could be hundreds of writers. Finally quality control is actually only a writer's concern. If things go wrong the customer complains and then the admin demands the writer to revise the work. Probably the writer is then marked as being less trustworthy so in the future they may keep an eye at times. That is what defines quality control.

Commission does not go higher than 100% as far as I know since the total amount charged to any party is quantified at 100% followed by siphoning - fair or unfair of that total amount by various parties on the other side of table. But I suppose you are comparing the unequal distribution of the total amount among the parties compensated. And if that is the case then there are 400% - 500% commission in the writing industry as it is very likely that a page could be charged $50 by the company and the writer is given $10. This occurs in short deadline papers. I understand that fraudulent companies frequently engage in such behavior with the writer actually being paid less than $10, shady companies may pay from $12-$15, and the ethical companies will think that the writers deserve around $20.

If I had my own company then I would feel guilty if I didn't pay the writer at least $15. 40% commission is not a small amount to keep. New companies with negative cash flow characteristic of its infancy may keep 50% as commission. So since $ 25 per page is quite common to charge the customer, it should be common for a writer to expect at least $12.5 per page. I suppose that is not a norm even in established companies and writers can't stop singing their praises when they pay above or at $10 on average.

You misunderstand me. When in my earlier post where I talk about a shady company paying $12-$15, I was referencing a hypothetical case of charging the customer $50 first by the company. Here the "ethical" companies would come around paying $20 to the writer which is 40% of the total.

In my prior post I was asked about a situation where the customer was charged $25. Here a shady company would and does pay the writer around half of $12-$15 which would be from $6-$8.

Also, personally I consider 25% commission to be more than appropriate but if a company took around 40% then still I would not protest. But that does not seem to be the actual case and the companies on average take at least 60 %. And yes I did say at least because you are always competing against low bidders.

And that is why the essay industry reflects another example of outsourcing. But the reason why the "shady" companies are so in terms of its finances is not because they pay the writers $6-$8 which the writers would be ecstatic to gain, but because they will charge the customers "American" charges.

I was making generalizations while leaning more towards exposing the policies of the dubious companies. Even then I do agree that I have raised a question about the percentages paid to the writers from the total price, even in the case of well-established reliable companies. You stated that good companies have to man live-chat, customer orders and so on which of course I agree is energy and time consuming thus requiring a good cut. But if you look in my earlier posts you will read that I have highlighted cases from other industries which also have to perform the same chores while being an intermediary. In fact, their overhead matters can safely be assumed to be of greater concerns and their commission rates are still less than that found in the legitimate essay industry companies. However, this does not disqualify the essay industry but unlike other industries, it is still not competitive enough - I suppose - to thin the pay rates of various parties and gather smaller profits for themselves without finding themselves bankrupt.

As I had previously indicated, neither do I have an agenda to defame the company nor to uphold it. I don't have any particular issues with the company either. If you see in my first post in this thread, you will see that I was basically trying to tally people's opinions about the company as they were highly lacking otherwise. I do know that legitimate companies are known to have no reason for being mentioned since otherwise their legitimacy may only be more solidified which is equivalent to a recommendation. That is why I stated a few of my observations of the company which any other novel observer would find equally questionable - at least at a first glance - and let others reply on what they think about those matters.

I am well aware that recommendations are not allowed that is why the WB example I used was only to generate a scenario to explain my point better. In fact, I was so neutral towards taking any particular stance concerning that company that you unwittingly made a recommendation for it when you stated that, "The website you are referring to is known for its very fair pay structure and its hiring of top-quality writers.", thinking that I was groundlessly taking a negative stance against it. Neither then nor now am I intending to recommend it or oppose it as I could have easily used some other company to state my point more vividly.

And once again, I do not have any other motive. The reason why I did not contact the Urgent Thesis forum directly as you advised is because I like any other smart inquirer wanted to know the matter from people who are more likely to be free of affiliations.

You stated


You are right, they are not complaints because they are mere concerns and intelligently I decided to discuss them here instead of in the Urgent PhD Thesis forum.


I don't think this is true because recommendations are subtle forms of communications that create a positive picture of the matter under judgment applying abstract principles based on opinions. So stating that company ABC is a good company because they pay their writers good is a recommendation as it is opinionated. But stating that ABC pays 42% in winter and 35% in summer is not a recommendation. It is just absolute objective truth which is only being dispersed through communication. And I have been careful not to ask anything whose reply could be a matter of opinion.

Thanks for your replies which I forgot to mention in the last post. I do understand that the information you mentioned may be not something that the company may be willing to share publicly and so I will contact you directly now although not with any particular complaints.

Lets see ... everything you have highlighted from taxes to management wages apply to all business - or almost all - that include a web-based approach. So I don't know how is it comparing apples to oranges by just looking at your stated list. Quality Control may be even of greater concern in other industries as having a wrong person could result in catastrophic situations - much like the problems arising from the lack of a qualified staff at British Petroleum which is incomparable to a plagiarized essay in the case of writing companies.

So here is a depiction. A company charges a flat rate of $32 per page, pays the writer a flat rate of $12 per page and keeps $20 - which is still considered good for the writers. Now in an entire day it only receives 20 pages worth of orders so the company has a cash flow in of $400. Each order is one page to be completed on the same day so there are 20 orders. With only 20 orders, it may need one admin who makes sure the clients are set-up with the right writers. He makes sure - 20 times during the day I might add - that the writer is completing the paper within deadline and on the other hand soothes the client that the process is underway. And of course there could be more which the admin may be required to do but it most likely falls at a lower level than the two chores I stated.

Now all those 20 pages are to be read quite carefully by the quality controller to make sure that the papers follow the guidelines, are free of grammar errors, sound sophisticated up to the required level, are not plagiarized and meaningfully cited. Again there could be more but please don't mind enlightening me. Since there are only 20 pages to read I am going to assume that there is only one quality controller in this hypothetical case.

So now we have 2 people working and lets add two more as the CEO and a management personnel. You have already stated for some reason that the admin, quality control and management is very expensive. However, as I have reflected upon in my previous posts that all their functions can collapse into being intermediaries if the writer performs self-assessment of quality which any good writer will, stays in contact with the client and delivers the paper in time. But regardless, lets assume that we need the hand of the admin and the quality controller to oversee constantly.

So a typical writer is then able to complete 5 pages per day in perfection earning $60. It uses every nerve in his brain to reach a level of creativity that pens the paper. Of course, different subjects require different sorts of intelligence. Now lets give $180 to the CEO which is still less but only because the company is in its infancy and does not have much work. Let $40 -which is 10 % of the total cash flow on a daily basis deal with the overhead of server fees and electricity and other such matters. It could be more or less but do educate me with your opinion on it. Lets give out the other 3 members of the staff an equal portion of the remaining $180. So now everyone pays their taxes including the writer. The company pays a little more as corporate tax which depends on the size of the corporation. But the point is that the writer toiled all day to earn $60 while the 3 staff members I am sure could have worked on 40 more pages with ease before feeling the burn.

So again I would say that what you think as an exclusive cost of being a writing company is not true. More costs are generated in industries elsewhere who still give lion's share to the party performing the real work. The only real reason for the income gap is because this industry being in its infancy does not face real competion from verifiable and legitimate companies. It more or less can exercise monopoly although there may be many around the world. The market size dictates their policies. Second and more importantly, this industry may have a bleak future education lobby is not going to see it in any positive light if in the future the industry comes more to light. It may be completely disrupted and the CEOs know this very well. They perceive this and are acting very smartly as they try to gather most wealth in a limited time available.

That is just an outlook and the current situation does not make any difference to me as long as the income gap is not outrageous wide.

Do you think I am unaware that many of my sentences do not have commas at the right places? In fact, I may even forget to put a question mark where it is obviously required. What I don't do here is type 3 pages and then waste time to go back and make it sound fashionable so that readers can see how great a writer I am. And please don't start another conversation on the use of the word fashionable because I am sure you can easily make it a subjective issue. And I also know that the word "fashionable" above should also have been quoted and a good English professor will also tell me not to start a sentence with an "And", which I do here frequently. But unlike you, I don't regularly visit this website and neither do I have any inclinations to do so. I only come here if there is an issue that I consider to be pressing enough warranting a visitation. And nor do I intend to answer back to your subtle invitation for a belligerent give and take that is so typical of people on this site.

But let me say one thing. The sentence I quoted from the site I originally discussed with MRE seemed to be grammatically lacking and indicative of an ESL web designer or whoever was involved in crafting the page. The following sentence was quoted:

Work which normally takes several months will be completed to the highest possible standards in as little as 5 days, if you want and in one month, should you so choose.

This sentence may be grammatically correct but is certainly not framed aesthetically. It could have been crafted as follows:

If you want, work which normally takes several months will be completed to the highest possible standards in as little as 5 days or in a month, should you so choose.

There are better ways of stating that but I only intended to restructure the sentence and not reword it. Regardless, this discussion of that sentence is not to incite a wave of posts by any party in defense of any other party so please try to refrain yourself.

Now, as for your claim of my "adversity" to commas, I am not as much of a comma hater as much as I intend to claim that you are a commaphile. Most of my sentences where you may have placed a comma, do not necessarily require a comma. For example, in the sentence below,

I don't think this is true because recommendations are subtle forms of communications that create a positive picture of the matter under judgment applying abstract principles based on opinions.

Here you can put commas if you like to break it down, or not, depending on your mental capacity to process the sentence as a whole versus in fragments. I suppose you may be inclined to be of the second kind as I found your sentences to be soaked in commas, which for me only create interruption. But I did not make a judgment call and claim that you are handicapped in achieving higher cerebral functionality - at least not up to this point.

However, my initial sentence in this thread should have had commas inserted. It reads:

Judging from the lack of negative remarks they seem to be legitimate so I inquired further on their web site.

Here there should have been commas after "remarks" and "legitimate." But I am not here writing for money and neither to be exalted as a writer so I neglect all such requirements. However, I understand that any sentence that you may have written will be and has been ripped apart by hyenas, counting on a moment of weakness and so you may have learned to be extra careful. But you also learned to be like one in order to defend your own thoughts and make gigantic assumptions based on trivial findings in sentences posted by others. Now I am sure you can quote this last sentence and show me many sentences from my posts where I do not place commas or other lexical necessities in order to counter my phrasing of "trivial findings," trying to show how they are anything but trivial. But please control yourself from doing so because I don't intend to write yet another lengthy reply to any of your provocations.

As a final note, I think you got the idea of making dubious claims against me after I ignored to answer back to your posts from the "essaywriters" thread, as that is the only place I have actually posted material apart from here. You thought that you will be my teacher and I will be your student, so you started to cross your limits claiming complete ignorance on my part. From your writings it became clear to me that you are an industry insider, recommending the industry as a whole, and preserving the status quo. So it is meaningless for me to reply back. You can always make yourself sound more knowledgeable of the system in order to claim legitimacy while I will actually have to create my own company to prove you wrong, which is something you yourself have indicated. You can keep 70% and claim to your writers that it is stipulated by the costs. If you are right than this is the least efficient online industry - now don't start another issue by naming other industries which could be even less efficient. But if you are wrong then it still does not matter as your writers are delighted to get above or at $10/page. So it ends here for me. But you can keep on posting defamation as you like. While I may have desired "lion's share" - as per the other thread - you can keep on posting here against me to subconsciously assert in your mind that you rule this jungle of a forum as a lion. This is your "lion's share," which you cannot help but fight to preserve.

Okay, I will say this one last time assuming you missed my point earlier.

In almost all my posts, I have written around 3 pages each time. I basically write what comes in my mind and leave it as it is. I have an actual job to do. I don't get to sit here and write artistic literature while money is flowing in my company, where I keep 70-80% and pay the remaining to the writer. I am not here trying to correct spelling errors, punctuation errors, grammatical errors, lexical errors, or even make highly researched statements. In short, I am not here to take any defensive writing stance assuming great writers will reap me apart for the errors I will end up making otherwise. I was well aware of the grammatical mistakes I was making during my writing, but as long as the point was penned, I kept on going. I see that the informality of electronic messaging has completely been disregarded by the veterans of this forum. If you have some other idea then I should mention that I am not a professional writer either. So I am not here looking to communicate a resume.

I find it shameful to have to converse with you. Originally I wanted someone to go through my post(s), get the point, and make an attempt to reply back, with their opinion in hand. I didn't expect to be in a judgment seat, facing the self-appointed Judge Grammar.

If you still can't get it through your thick head, then let me be state it differently. I resent to write on this forum on matters which are only remotely my concern. I still went through it, but unlike you, this is not my hobby. Probably only one thing you know - which is to write - is something you need to pompously display as being of superior nature. Well, keep on doing it. And by the way, I can find more errors in my posts. But if that invalidates the points I try to convey, then that makes the readers of this forum even stupider than you.

If I make writing errors, then that disqualifies me in making judgments on officially presented pages.

I can't understand why would you hold such a moronic "assumption." And yes, I have used the word "assumption" here because it is perfectly appropriate. But you can do one thing as a service for me. Count all the times when I used that word or its derivatives, divide the number of lines I posted with that count, and then make fun of your findings. I am sure it will amuse you even more.

The subject of this debate is not the error but the context of the error. If there is an error on a company web page then that is an official mistake needing correction. Official statements should reflect a state of accuracy and not display a nature of preliminary drafting. But according to you, I make a mistake here conversing with a second-class person like you, and that disqualifies me to post grammar errors reflected in money earning web pages.

I am not claiming that the mistakes I made are due to "writing quickly." This is your "assumption." I said that I write what comes to my mind without going back to change the structure of that sentence, as long as the point is communicated. That is why there are run-ons and so on. I have no intention to correct errors in spellings or a mistaken use of word when it does not earn me a penny. But you on the other hand, are earning fame and legitimacy for your company, in every post you create.


Stop using that word. Do what you just preached. And it is not my 'assumption' either. I am more than sure that whatever company you own must basically chant that principle.

Judge Grammar


Grammar falls in the realm of avoiding run-ons, correctly using prepositions and so on. If it was about 'writing skills,' then I would have rightly called you 'Judge Jargon.'


It seems to me that you are more fond of that word than you allege me of being. No writer is a 'well paid' writer, not even Western ones. Every writer is underpaid. You take the opposing position in defense of the industry where you have a considerable stake. Even at a base pay of $12-15, it is still not a good pay. And if your company does not keep 70%, then it keeps 60%. And I am sure that is a badge of honor for you.

Well, you should be happy that I am in a state of 'assuming' and not 'alleging' - at least in the matters that I am. That only shows that I am willing to be convinced but now it seems to me that I was wrong.


Firstly, you cannot claim that someone is qualified or not, unless you are a judge in the Court of Law. This you are not - except the self-appointment you have adorned yourself with. Every person has the right to put forward such remarks as I did. No one is disqualified because you say so. No one has appointed you to regulate the industry and any claims against it. In fact, every ESL student should judge a company image by remarking their web site quality. If they find any doubtful matters then they should post them here in order to find answers. If they write in broken English, then that does not disqualify them to remark their linguistic concerns about a company. But applying your point, it seems that the framework of this forum in not meant to support inquisitive students. You want to paint the picture of the industry as you prefer. You reflect a typical authoritarian system. You want to be the judge and you want to appoint a jury of your choosing.

Secondly, I never 'corrected what was not an error.' I put the sentence structure for consideration. I even stated that it is not incorrect. But I still hold that it is not properly stated. And of course, since here I write pages full of drafts without attempting to properly state my position, you will find me disqualified again. After all, to you, both situations are equal.


Don't patronize me. When I claim that paying writers 40% is not exactly ethical, that does not mean that they 'can' be paid 90%. Forget about my 'pet peeve,' as you constantly remark that I only have a single point to put forward over and over again. You should be brought to awareness of your own pet peeve where you constantly claim legitimacy by telling me to open my own company. In other words, foreign companies are absolutely fraudulent while we epitomize ethics.

Why save for "LANGUAGE?" Your point was that if I displayed linguistic errors then I should stay away from such matters. You tried to coerce that opinion directly as well as indirectly. But now you claim that it was just "difficult to pass it up." In other words, it was a moment for you to bask in pretentious claims of grammatical greatness.


My entire introductory post put the issues forward, more or less giving an opportunity to the responder to prove my 'assumptions' as being misguided. If you read carefully then you would have known. And I don't want to restate it again.


'considered' here means that it is accepted. Thus it does not reflect my opinion that $12 from $32 is good.


The context here was the total which I believe I cited as $35.


The commission here refers to the amount kept by the company.


The company may still does not find it easy to make a profitable existence thus the periodic justification.


Since 25% is where I would apply, 15% more would be the most that I would divulge.


It should be clear that my mind is made up. It is your lack of comprehension that results in faulty conclusions.

There was nothing 'ignorantly' about it. If there was then the original responder should have taken offense at it. He did not, but now YOU act as if you were offended.


Again, another display of moronic opinions. I did not 'position' myself to 'correct' anyone's language. Once again, the original responder did not see me in that light either. In fact, he stated that he felt similarly when he originally read that sentence from the web site. Now, there is no 'ignorance' in me questioning that sentence, as I have already stated that even a ESL speaker with very broken English may state their concerns, regardless of their of their own abilities in those matters. But now you are changing your story again as you struggle to find a justifiable cause for you taking an 'offense.' In my opinion, your best bet at justification is mindless jingoism.


Once again, I did not 'claim' anything but rather 'put forward' a sentence for consideration. And my act was not so unnatural as you make it sound. No one but you find it so.


I did make a mistake in properly stating my point here. I meant to say, "Since 25% is what I would apply as commission, ..."


I see you like to resort to your 'pet peeve' far more often than you claim me of having one.

I have not gone above paying writers more than 75% and have also given a green light to a pay of 60%.

And of course, you have to end it with a propaganda that my ideology would result in going 'down in flames.'


This is exactly what I meant when I said that I 'resent' posting here. Basically, it bores me to have to defend myself against meaningless matters while the original point is neglected. Well, the only advice that I can cycle back to you is to 'stay out of the kitchen.'

Why do you claim to be so naive about it? You keep on telling me to open my company to prove you wrong, since that is the only possible avenue - according to you. But you also keep on adding that whatever plan I adopt, will go down in flames. This is how you want to portray the outlook of this matter, all the while indirectly asserting, that present system is perfectly fine.


Absolutely NOT. The original point of THIS THREAD did not need your input. As for the other thread, I refrained myself from responding and have given the reasons why.


Please don't get bored this time then.


I guess to you that is a matter of opinion then.

Your own words here show how you consider yourself a 'lion' on this forum. But please don't add 'all who responded' to your argument now. However, it could be that you operate in a 'pride.'


Hyenas can apply immense jaw pressures to 'smash' things to 'smithereens.'


These wild animals have thick skins that also make their heads thick.


disagreeing to you, equals


which also equals


which to me equals


So yes, what you now consider a disagreement is an insult. It was also a 'moronic assumption' that my carelessness here disqualifies me to make assessments.


Here is another example of an oblique insult. Don't thank God about it, first of all. And don't claim any ownership towards being a professional writer who regulates this field.


A business model or any other model for that matter, functions in an ideological arena. Varying shades of capitalistic mindsets are confronted by equally divided political systems. Not to mention that there is always the presence of psychological undertones. In your case, it just does not let you question the status quo.


I don't find this forum boring. I 'resented' arguing - which led you to believe as having smashed by arguments to smithereens. In any case, I thought you were starting to find ME boring.

I guess you have adopted another pet. It seems to me that you have an inferiority complex when it comes to 'verbiage.' Anytime you feel threatened with someone's writing, you start to assume that they are lacking. Of course, now you will try to shower me with my previous quotes to prove me wrong.


I see that you like to dig into the past and make gigantic, baseless assumptions - a quality that displays your research skills. I also noticed that you like to incite your fellow supporters to take an interest and give you a helping hand in this argument. Despite the fact that I didn't 'target' anyone's website, you realize that that particular notion is buried deep within my previous posts, making it hard to find. So now you fabricate new stories. I have to think what other animal is as low as that. May be none are so low. You stand in your own class - much lower than second-class.


So now, the theme of your post is 'illiteracy.' Identifying similarities between you and wild animals really got your little heart aching. Thus you are forced to attempt inflicting similar pain. Well I am sorry if it hurt so bad, but unlike your claims against me, mine are true.

Digging back into your 'actual' past - unlike what you allege me of - I discovered many claims against you that I am sure are completely true. The following is what I found:

WRT/Melissa YOU UTTER CRY BABY! I have outargued you and shown you to be a liar and a libeller. I have pointed out how false your arguments are and how bad your English skills are.

IDIOT IDIOT IDIOT! You should be put down, you mad dog. (I guess that's the animal I was looking for.)

Now, back to your moronic assumptions.


Tell that to the person whose reply - unlike yours -was welcomed. He stated, "It is strange to me as well being from Texas, but that is the way the Brits do it." So,if any 'literate' person should have known, then I guess most, if not all Americans are illiterate according to you. And only in your jingoist haven do people actually care what is British and what is not. Just try to maintain control over your tiny island and stop assuming that people speak English in admiration of the Brits. British English in not universal by far, that 'any literate person' would care to know.


How many times do I have to tell you that I don't claim or ever claimed that it wasn't 'perfectly alright.' You tell me now, don't you have a 'thick head?'


Yes, the great patronizer... I did not 'criticise' any company 'to my heart's content.' Initially you agreed that everything I wrote - except the language part - was categorically a general inquiry. Now to you, it is being critical and that too of sentimental nature, without having any validity. So I guess you should be a good British guard and stand at the forefront of this forum stopping everyone who comes here, because everyone who comes here with a valid inquiry are being 'critical' to their 'heart's content.'


I guess you should open a school where you can 'criticize' to 'YOUR heart's content,' because that is all you seem to constantly take refuge in.


Now I am suddenly a writer in your mind while earlier on you thanked God that I was not a writer. Can't you make up your mind. I am sure any newcomer who reads this posts, does not see me as a "ESL writer" or an "average one" or even a good EFL writer. Only in your depraved mind does it seem to you that it is relevant at all. As I had already pointed out, you have only one refuge, which is being a writer. So before I or anyone else discovers that you are horrible at it, you start finger-pointing early on. That is what I discovered in other lengthy conversations you had and that is what you are attempting now. On top of that phobia, you have a jingoist complex blindly defending any essay website ending with '.uk."

I am not the one who needs to take a shot in that direction. It has already been taken, as I pointed out, and you must be very familiar with being in that seat.


Let's start with yours first. If you can somehow remember from just a few posts ago, you accused me of calling you a 'hyena' as an insult. To you, it was uncalled for. This is what you quoted from my statements:


Now, in that very same post, you said the following:


So I stated as a reply how 'smashing' my arguments to 'smithereens' is what can be characterized as a hyena's ability. This is what I stated in reply:


But then, how do your 'English comprehension skills' match up? Let's look at your reply to figure that out. You replied to my reply:


So the metaphoric depiction that should be clear to a 5th grader, was way above your head. You thought that I was 'illuminating' you as to what hyenas do. And I was being the 'clever one.' I certainly was not trying to be the 'clever one.' But you certainly proved to be the 'stupid one.'


Again with 'criticism?' Why don't you have it posted on the front page of this forum that any discussion here will be considered a criticism. And who are are to care or not care? Is anyone here obligated to ask you whether you care what they have to say? Are you some sort of an animal, through the mouth of which everyone should pass their conversations, and post what comes out of the back end? If so, then please make it public.


Notwithstanding the concept of 'criticism,' I am hard-pressed to understand what right have you been granted, leading you to assume to tell others to stay away from LANGUAGE. None. You know that, but what can you do? You need to defend your motherland mindlessly - even when there is no offense meant.


Maybe you should start chanting it before you go to sleep soon. You will have wonderful dreams of how great an Englishwoman you are ... correcting others with your 'hard-truths.'


I see my 'Brit' comments made YOU 'fly off the handle.'


Are you trying to tell me or are trying to convince yourself? You are monotonously repeating yourself. Then again, that's all you have been doing throughout your posts.


So you perceived that you are distancing many 'ESL writers' with your comments, and now you have to win them over by categorizing them as 'average' and 'excellent.' Also start coming up with other classes, because I will end up offending you to the point, that you will soon start chanting that I am way beneath the below-average ESL writers.



Yes goddess, I should eat any fruit I want, except the fruit of 'LANGUAGE.' Then you won't hassle me out of this forum garden.