Focus Group - an entrepreneur looking at establishing my own essay writing company.

What a shocker-no answer from the a*hole.


Yes, the pansy (AKA, "editor75") is an absolute moron. The fool doesn't even recognize the fact that spelling has little to do with grammar.

Gee, I wonder why the moron conveniently dodged the fact that my percentage for spelling words correctly is at least 99.9995%.


You really need to learn how to use words correctly and in proper context, ya dumb. "Repeatedly" suggests that something has occurred at least three times. If something occurs two times, the proper terminology is "twice" or "a couple of times." You are intentionally trying to skew the facts, as usual. That is what makes you a cowardly loser.

if you want me to explain what "global errors" are to you, you're going to have to act a little more ladylike, and a little less like a playground bully throwing a temper tantrum because he can't get his way.

otherwise, there's always Google. try "global vs. local errors."

Well, then I'm sure you're thrilled when you see the majority of my posts do not contain the errors you've pointed out. I wouldn't call your comments "lessons," as really all you did was hint at the mistakes without actually pointing them out and then attempt to insult me, but luckily for both of us these errors were quite obvious to me upon re-reading my posts. I am very happy knowing that you won't be losing any sleep over this.

There are no such errors in my posts. Nice try, little man. Stop being such a damn coward and use the quote function to support your claims.

Basically, you're saying that because I and WB have corrected other people's posts, we are fair game for correction, but even though you "correct" other people's (i.e. our) posts, you are exempt from the same standards you hold us to.

Logic much?

pheelyks, is WB really someone you want to pattern your online life after? he's sort of a lunatic.

editor75, is there any chance you will ever actually respond to my posts in a way that advances a discussion, rather than continuing with a series of vague and ineffectual insults?

Your schoolyard sidetracking won't work. Answer the questions and challenges, ya little b**-h.

WB-- I'd be glad to, but first I need to know that you understand the difference between global and local errors. after that, we can work on talking about how you work for SNR and pretend to be objective, stalked forum members and went through their garbage, make laughable global errors while declaring yourself an arbiter of proper English, and are very transparently pretending to be a woman. I feel that before we address any of your nitpicking over my choice of comma placement, we should maybe talk about these not insubstantial issues.

pheelyks-- logic? reason? I don't see much of that in your profiling of ESL writers, so why should I respond in kind? besides, shouldn't a poet like yourself be "discussing" less like a mathematician? I think you need to rethink your tack. try not repeating the same dumb, self-serving defense mechanism that anyone who disagrees with you is not logically furthering the discussion. see how that goes.

You clearly don't actually read anything on this forum. MeoKahn and I went back and forth for weeks about his claim that "all Englishes are equal"--that was a rational discussion involving disagreement. I also posted a fairly detailed explanation of why some of your ideas for changing the industry are not desirable to writers, which you completely ignored.

This post does not contain any insults, oversimplified labels, or unjustified conclusions--can you respond in kind?

it's sort of funny that you respond to a plea not to use self-serving defense mechanisms with your second-most-tired old saw, pheelyks, which is, "since you disagree with me, you obviously didn't actually read the posts." you have beaten this transparent, pompous assumption into the ground already. if you can't take off your blinders, you could at least change up your game a little. it would make engaging you in these conversations a lot less boring.

Actually, my implication was: "since there are many posts that refute your claim, you obviously don't read the things you're making generalizations about."

Here's one thread where I have disagreements with people (specifically mayur_digitized) and explain those disagreements rationally and at length:
essayscam.org/forum/es/is-website-really-pheelyks-2322/ - Is website really pheelyks

Here's another:
Who can call English their own?

And another:
Still want to hire a native English writer? Half Americans in a big American city are illiterate! :)

That'll do for now, I think.

Where are the threads where I repeat


?

I've heard your two default defense mechanisms enough to recognize them with a weary sigh, pheelyks. if you're so fascinated in sifting through your own posts, I'm sure you can find more examples of them than I can-- not to mention, I have better things to do with my time. --unless you keep track of your disagreements with others to use as quick references in future disagreements... that's so completely crazy to me that it makes me laugh, but it's not something I'd put past you. after all, you're sounding more like WB every day.

I know. Making claims that are completely contrary to the evidence and then ignoring that evidence when you're smacked in the face with it seems like a full-time occupation for you.

haha

• 
  MrSockpuppet.jpg
  

And there you have it, folks.

pheelyks attack tactic 1: "I make X amount more money than you."

2: "(disparaging, borderline-racist dismissal). English obviously isn't blah blah blah."

3: "(sophomoric insult)."

pheelyks defense tactic 1: "you obviously didn't read the post you're referencing."

2: "well, your just unable to speak English as good as me."

3: "seeing as how you are unable to have a polite, rational, logical discussion about that sophomoric insult I just called you..."

wtg, pheelyks. it's good to see the poets of our generation have not lost their creativity, wit, or charm.

How about you provide an example?


Well, that's true, considering that pheelyks has been posting EVIDENCE (you know, that useless stuff that you avoid like the plague) and well-reasoned arguments.


Clearly, you don't, "interested observer."

even if those three useless, repetitive posts up there don't exactly address the above points in a spirit of truth and transparency, it's at least good to know that your protege has your stamp of approval... although I'm not positive it doesn't make him feel just a little bit queasy. am I right, pheelyks?

The last several posts in this thread have been me attempting to engage in discussion and you repeating the same baseless bulls-i*. The fact that you think you have any credibility left is laughable.

I'm sorry, pheelyks, but that was a closed question. it's either "yes," or "no."

thanks for the repost, btw, but really... it's right up there. sheesh.

I didn't respond to any question you've asked. See the big chunk of claptrap I quoted? That's what I was responding to. As for a response to your inane and pointless question,

yes, pheelyks, of course I see your quote-and-paste. hammering it home... it's less than 5 posts old, so it's like double vision.

I guess I can understand your reluctance to answer my closed question. I don't like some of my colleagues either, but I'm not about to broadcast that fact somewhere they can see it. it's best to keep harmony in the workplace, even if it's a virtual one. you wouldn't want WB stealing any of your order requests.

Watermelon.

like I said, I understand your reluctance. I'm sure WB does, too.

Daffodil.

WB, have you noticed that your crony is so afraid to say you don't make his skin crawl that he's been reduced to complete gibberish? I think another "rescue" is in order.

Spurious.

Do you seriously believe that your posts make any sense or have any value? I'm curious about how your twisted, deviant mind works.

thanks, WB. that ought to calm pheelyks down enough so that he stops babbling.

you have some nerve, though, calling me deviant. you're the one violating social norms on this board, WB. your tendency to lie and misrepresent yourself, combined with your virulent, paranoid, infantile perspective, presents an affront to the norms that make many other message boards helpful, pleasant places to be.

Any proof amongst my 7,400+ posts since 2007? NOPE.


Any proof amongst my 7,400+ posts since 2007? NOPE.


Any proof amongst my 7,400+ posts since 2007? NOPE.


Only an abysmal, sad creature can spend so much time posting in a forum that it doesn't like.

WB, I'm here to tell what I know. what I want people to know is this: you're a fraud and a liar. there's nothing objective about your offensive presence here; you are here to promote the company of which you're an employee, and protect it against its competitors.

You're a broken record. Everyone here knows your bogus schtick. What I am requesting is for you to post some evidence-any legitimate evidence at all-to support your accusations. Why is that so very difficult for you?

I liked holding it over you.

but since the mod says I must, I'll have to say it. I saw screen-shots of you being requested as a writer on SNR pages. why anyone would be deluded enough to request you as their preferred writer is one of the world's great mysteries. but I suppose I'm over-estimating the intelligence level of the average industry client. your move, scumbag.

THAT's your "proof"? LMAO!

1. Post the screenshots.

2. Post evidence of me completing an order for SNR.

3. Post evidence of my existence-ever-in SNR's system.

Yeah, that's what I thought, cow patty.

I didn't keep the screen-shots, nor do I have access to SNR's internal mechanisms. you and I both know the truth, and that's enough for me. being a man of my word, I don't share your obsession with pseudo-empiricism.

Of course you didn't keep them. Why would you want to keep evidence against the long-time target of your propaganda? Nice try, you lying piece of s-i*.

By the way, where did you find these "screenshots"? (I'm sure that they are no longer accessible, right?)

haha... nice... "...right?"

are you worried? don't worry; I didn't keep them. I'm not running a full out expose. I just like rattling the baboon cages. call it a vice.

Answer the question.

wondering who sold you out? try asking nice.