Of course, the mod also has the ability to reverse it.
Let me show you who posted absurd topics:
"Enough is enough, fraudsters. As they say, "man-up" or shut up.
This thread represents a golden opportunity for the known fraudsters from Ukraine and Pakistan to prove their baseless assertions that legitimate companies (i.e., what the utter lack of contrary evidence proves are the fraudsters' honest, law-abiding competitors) in the US, UK, or CA also engage in fraud and/or intentional misrepresentation against consumers and/or freelance writers.
RULES OF PARTICIPATION:
1. Conjecture is not allowed.
2. Hearsay is not allowed.
3. Accusations-against any member, non-member, site, or company-are not allowed unless accompanied by verifiable evidence from a neutral source"
This is the first post by WB and as you can see, she started with setting up the rules- all herself.. I don't know if any member is allowed to set the rules for posting here? If this forum is moderated I am not sure whether a member shall be allowed to dictate terms...
Second example of Extremely useful thread:
"Well, it's no surprise that a fraudster would completely ignore that RULES of the thread.
In my opinion, the moderator should delete stu4's post because it is a) in violation of the clear rules of the thread; b) simply irrelevant.
As proven by the URL that ever-so-brilliant stu4 posted (thanks for saving me the time and effort, by the way, Stewy), SNR has a partnership with ET. Neither company makes an effort to "hide" anything. To believe Stewy's defamatory accusation, one would also have no choice but to believe that nobody in either company could "hide" the connection (if they had any desire to do so) by quickly applying a redirect script to the URL so that it appears on the ET domain. As I have also proven, ET hires its own writers, some of whom I suspect also then work for SNR (considering the partnership between the two companies). If you'd like, Stewy, I can shoot an email to SNR, asking them to sign-up here to clarify the situation and disprove your many lies (not that I need the help)."
A clear example of whose commercial interests WB is serving here...
Thrid example of WB's useful thread: You can read between the line..... the level of soft tone adopted for SNR and ET
"P.S. My contract with SNR was faxed to and from a New Jersey phone number, and I received a 1099 form (self-employment) at the end of the year (much to my dismay). SNR is most definitely located in the US (or it follows US tax law for absolutely no reason), so my guess would be that ********* is equally legitimate."
Now Look at this thread:
" Yesterday, 10:44PM
stu4:
Verifiable proof: whois.domaintools/*********
Have you noticed one thing on this link? A company which openly claims to be serving only US and UK students and hire only native writers, is most visited by Indian and Pakistanis.. and most of them can be their writers too... so here is another proof of a verifiable lie that they are continousely posting on their site and tricking their customers... I can say with 1000% certainty that a custom essay writing site can not remain profitable for sustainable period of time unless it does not have on its list writers from Pakistan and India......"
When I indicated this fact, I received one reply from WB and that too was unrelated and than this thread was closed.... I left it to you- the reader of this forum (except WB and Party) to decide yourself who off-tracked? Was my above message irrelevant to the thread? You can check above link and see yourself the site stats and you will notice that after US, Pakistan and India are two places from where visitors hit the site.. so the game is really simple... US Customers, Indian and Pakistani writers...
