FIND OUT ABOUT THESE ESSAY SCAMMERS!

The following websites are essay scammers for sure!

Rushessay.com
Customwritings.com
bestessays.com


AND MANY MORE.

I ordered from them, and they would never meet the deadline. They wanted to keep extending and extending the deadline. I looked up this website and discovered the scams they had going on, so I canceled before I wouldn't be able to get my money back! What angers me the most is how dishonest they are over the phone. When I would ask to speak to the supervisor they would make some excuse so I wouldn't be able to. They also kept insisting that they would get my paper done, and it never happened. Also, when I called the number for bestessays.com, I would ask, "Is this rushessay.com?" and they would say yes. When I called rushessay.com, I would ask, " Is this bestessay.com"? and they would say yes! This confirmed that all the Ukrainian scam websites are working together!

If you hear the Ukrainian accent, then 100% sure it is a scam. It's those Ukrainian scammers! The only way to be safe is if when you call you speak with someone who has an English, American, or Canadian accent! Finally, I discovered that at least one legit essay writing service exists! *********

That line has to go!

That line doesn't have to go unless there is evidence that it is a scam company.
WB, you state that companies are legit all the time.

Sorry, but I believe that you are wrong. It is blatant, unsolicited promotion, which is not allowed. Could that entire post stand on its own without the last line? You bet.


You know perfectly well that I do not promote any companies. NEVER do I recommend a company. The only time that I even mention that any particular company is legitimate (not fraudulent) is when:

1. I read accusations of "fraudulent business practices" against a given company that I know to be false, due to the investigations that I have undertaken against EVERY major company in the industry;

2. when I get CALLED OUT, personally, in connection with a given company's supposed "fraud."

It is blatant in your opinion. You are misinterpreting that line. Did I recommend them? No. Did I say other people should use them? No. I simply stated my opinion. It doesn't have to go. Sorry.

- John

Sorry, MR. 2 Posts, but I believe that I'm a bit more familiar with the rules that are you. From the TOS:

"6. The EssayScam Forum is not a place for advertisements or publicity in any way."

Your statement constitutes unsolicited, positive PUBLICITY. "Opinion" or not, it's publicity. So, yes, the moderator should remove the last line.

Just because I have a life and don't spend every second of the day on this website doesn't mean that I cannot read. The fact that it is unsolicited has nothing to do with anything, so you can stop saying that. When a thread is started the information is unsolicited as well.....-_- . One could also argue that all the negative things you write about scam websites is NEGATIVE publicity. Instead of whining about a sentence you THINK broke the rules, how about you let the moderators worry about it. The point is that the websites I mentioned are scammers, and the other is legit. If you have an argument about the website being a scam as well, then please write about that. Not trivial topics such as the rules.....-_-

Let the insults begin!


Please, by all means, argue that all day long. You're right! Did you happen to miss the NAME of this site? It's called "EssaySCAM.org," not "EssayLEGIT.org." This forum is here to assist those who have already been defrauded and warn others about the sites that perpetrate the acts of fraud. This site is absolutely NOT here to assist people in determining which sites are safe to patronize.

Anyone with half of a brain knows exactly what the rules are meant to prevent: POSITIVE publicity—in the form of fake testimonials—by site owners and their agents.

Nice assumption, yet the quote above from your previous post says otherwise. =)
Again, let the owners worry about it. Go out and get laid. You might loosen up a bit.

That is not correct. The OP offered his opinion, not a recommendation. Opinions are well within the scope of the rules of the forum. Rule #2:

"All posts are the property of the posters. Such posts express the personal views and opinions of the poster which may or may not be the opinions of EssayScam.org."



I never said you promoted or recommended a company. Use your vaunted reading comprehension skills. I said that you have said that a company is legit. You didn't deny that. This person too only stated that a company is legit. That is not the same as a promotion or an advertisement.

You know why I know I'm right and you're wrong? B/c there is a long list of posts stating that different companies are legit left up on this forum for anyone to read. Do a search of "legit" on the forum and you will see ppl naming the following as all legit: Ivory research, Papermasters (including you), Custompapers.com, Flashpoint Education, Elephant Essays, and probably a slew of others that I'm not remembering. Even "the company that must not be named" has been labeled as legit, more than once, by you.


Your justification for why it's ok for you to break what you believe to be the rules, but not others, isn't persuasive. And you are forgetting the rule where the call about what constitutes an advertisement is up to the moderator:

"EssayScam and its moderators have the sole discretion to determine what constitutes an advertisement."

See the sole discretion part? You aren't a mod. Stop acting like one. If a site mod decides that the post isn't appropriate, the mod can remove it. If you think that the post is out of line, you can contact the mod and let them make the call (something I have done myself on different occasions).

However, I don't think the one line is going to be an issue, frankly. But more importantly, you shouldn't be bullying new posters by twisting the rules and attempting to silence them. It's gotten really old.

So what types of positive publicity does this site not prevent? Oh, just the ones that you imply based on your evidences? :p

Feel better? Tough guy, no doubt.


I always try to be civil and polite with you, but you always get personal. That's unfortunate. I don't need your permission to post what I know is right, and it looks like the mod agreed with my assessment.


Um, you conveniently did not quote this line:




Really? Is that why the mod removed the PROMOTION?


It's quite persuasive, actually, probably because it's FACT. I do not post on the topic unsolicitedly. If I get called out, you can bet your bottom dollar that I'm going to respond with every piece of evidence at my disposal to defend myself. Sorry if you can't understand the difference between what/how/why I post what I post and John's unsolicited PROMOTION that the mod deleted.


I really don't care what you think. I'll always post what I think is in the best interests of the forum and the general public.

If you have proof that any of the evidence in my investigations is not true, I invite you to provide specifics.

Similarly, if you have any evidence that a certain site is fraudulent, I invite you to post that, as well. You insinuate that a certain site engages in fraud and I choose to not report it. Well, by all means, post the evidence that I am "intentionally not reporting." I will be more than happy to admit that my investigations have somehow missed a certain site's fraudulent business practices.

I don't always get personal. In fact, I rarely get personal. You would be hard pressed to find examples of me getting personal. You have about 452 posts to look through to try to find me getting personal. I did go after that sexist guy who insulted you, I guess that could count, but maybe you'll give me a free pass since I was defending you.

On the other hand, you like to use hyperbole as part of a strategy for character assassination. Everyone who disagrees with you is a crook or a fraud or getting personal, I am fully awaiting the accusation of being a fraud owner myself one of these days. So I guess your assertion isn't all that surprising.

I also didn't insult you.

And, as always, you insult first:



I have more than half a brain, thank you. You, however, drop insults so casually in your posts that I think you don't even realize it anymore. You insulted John first, not the other way around. Or was "Mr. 2 Posts" a term of endearment?


I never said that you needed my permission to post. I merely exercised my right to express my opinion, an opinion that does not reflect the view of this forum or website.

And other people don't need your permission to post either, get it?


Nope, answered, not persuasive and gave reasons why. You just conveniently forgot that part.


And all my other examples, still standing. But you conveniently ignore those.

And, as I posted, the rules say that anything can get removed at the sole discretion of a mod. You, however, are not the mod and you should stop acting like it. That is in the best interests of this forum, as your abrasive behavior no doubt drives many readers away.


You also post when a company that you think is legit gets called out. That is very different from responding because you, personally, get called out. Do you want quotes of the companies that you've noted are legit where you were not called out? It won't be difficult to find. Although, admittedly, most of the examples were about that company which cannot be named, so those posts may not be around anymore. Pity.

My investigations and valuable contributions bring far more visitors than those who you claim leave.


Right, just as I have defended your LEGITIMATE, personal favorite (which I don't need to name) on several occasions. Plus, you really need to stop twisting my positions and intentionally making it appear as though I did not ALREADY clearly state that fact:


Need I remind you about how YOU came to the rescue of a certain site when I stated that companies providing more words per page are a better deal for customers? I didn't even mention the site that you defended, yet you came out guns blazing! Why? Because YOU felt the moral obligation to defend against what YOU felt was a faulty claim against a site that YOU know to be legit. In fact, you went above and beyond the call of duty in defending that site, considering that I didn't even type the name of the site in my post. Plus, at the time that you launched your defense, you were well aware that I had personally defended that site myself in the past! So, get your own house in order before criticizing me.

Do you have evidence of that? Yes, that's a joke. I crack myself up.

Look, there isn't a forced choice, is there? You can still make valuable contributions without all the abrasive bullying, right?

I appreciate a well placed put down as much as the next person, but yeesh, every major thread on this forum seems to contain you fighting with someone else or telling them what to do.


That company isn't my personal favorite. You have no idea who my personal favorite is. I'd post it but that would be against the rules, wouldn't it?



Is that thread still around or was it deleted? B/c you are now completely misrepresenting my position. For the record, I didn't defend any particular site. I brought up "that site" as an example because I thought we would both agree that it was a legit site (as you yourself had noted its legitimacy). I brought up another site as well but you ignored that one, so we didn't need to talk about it. I didn't care about "that site" except to demonstrate that I thought your argument that the number of words per page identified frauds was incorrect. I still believe that to be the case. But that has nothing to do with my need to defend "that site." See how I don't even mention "that site" b/c I have no interest in promotion. So now, anyone not familiar with "that thread" will have no clue what "that site" means but they can perhaps get a good laugh about how silly this is getting.

I'm fairly certain that you can search through this forum and find criticisms of "that site" without a response from me. Does that make my house in order?

But, speaking of "that thread," both you and I identified a couple of companies as being legit. Was that against the rules? I certainly didn't think so and I don't think you did either but we certainly talked more about the companies than the one revised line in the OP of this thread.

Thank you for proving my point. You name-dropped, not me. I NEVER mention that any particular site is "legitimate" unless I see someone post an accusation—that I know to be false—about a given site. The ONLY reason that you mentioned that site by name is to defend it against what YOU believe to be a "legit" site against what YOU deemed to be a blanket statement on my part. You can try to spin all day, but that is what you did, and that is a fact.


Feel free to ask the mod for site statistics. I GUARANTEE you that my posts and threads have brought more traffic to this site than anyone else's.


Well, it's healthy to laugh at oneself, especially when proven wrong.


Why should I not respond to people who knowingly break the rules? (In anticipation of what you will surely WANT to type, I choose to help the mod decide whether or not a post is legit.) Posts are permanent. If I don't draw attention to what I know is wrong or against the rules, there's a chance that it could leave a permanent scar. Sorry if you don't agree with my tactics.


You name-dropped (even though I started the thread by clearly stating that I was referring solely to "sites from Ukraine and Pakistan"), so the cat was out of the bag. You also backed me into a corner. If you hadn't name-dropped, I certainly would not have done so.

Again, a misrepresentation. I pointed out that you had name-dropped previously by naming "that site" as legit. That point was critical to my argument - I specifically looked for a company that you had named as legit and then demonstrated that the legit company did not meet your 300 words per page litmus test for legitimacy. By demonstrating that it was possible for a legit (as identified by you) company to not provide 300 words/page, I disproved your argument.

That isn't the same as me name-dropping. I just pointed out an inconsistency in your posts. I assume you are starting to understand that since you gave up on calling it my "favorite" site.



This sentence is only mildly comprehensible. Try again.

And do you really think you can read my mind and motivations? You've already swung and missed in your assertion about my favorite site. Your jedi mind tricks don't work on me.



It's also healthy to laugh at your hypocrisy: all your claims that people provide evidence while refusing to provide it yourself. That's funny.

But wrong about what? That you are unnecessarily rude and obnoxious on this board? I don't see you disproving that... you insulted first on this thread, not me. You conceded that point. You aren't a mod but you run around correcting other people's posts. You could just post helpful information without the insults, but you won't even entertain that as an option. You accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you with being a fraud or a criminal, just like you insinuated with me and my not so favorite site.

And I can easily start quoting a slew of insults by you on this board - on just the front page of the forum's most recent posts.



I don't envy the mod those "helpful" conversations. But I guess that explains why you get to consistently break the rules of this forum.

You know which rule I'm thinking of? Your favorite no doubt:
"All posters agree to be respectful to each other."



So why haven't you convinced the mod to remove all of the other posts talking about other legit companies? Seems pretty fickle on your part.

But I'll remember this. The next time that a company I personally know to be legit is criticized by a poster, I'll be sure to defend that company with the proof of my experience. And you had better not criticize or accuse me of promotion.



You're the one making the assertion. It's your burden to provide the evidence. So let's see it.

Or let's not. I don't care. The fact is, you could benefit the forum without engaging in the bullying or name-calling, again and again and again.



I can't tell if you are lying or simply misremembering. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you just aren't remembering correctly since it looks like the post has been deleted. I'll refresh your memory: In your first post, you did NOT specify that your argument was specific to frauds from the Ukraine and Pakistan. In fact, we discussed that point later and I stated that, had you made that specification early on, I would probably not have bothered to post. Remember now? Good.

I'd really LOVE to dive in all this myself, but I got a dissertation to complete from scratch in less than 12 hours so...

WRONG! I specifically stated, at the very top of the thread, that I am referring to companies from UKRAINE and PAKISTAN. You knew perfectly well that the company that you felt the unsolicited need to defend is AMERICAN. Therefore, your entire argument was/is useless, irrelevant, and completely unnecessary.


You clearly don't grasp the concept, do you? What came first—the chicken or the egg? Whenever this post of mine (to which you refer) took place, it surely was in direct response to one of the following:

* someone calling me out in some way;
* someone specifically asking me to prove something specific about that site;
* someone suggesting that the site is fraudulent or not legit.


Low. Pathetic. Cowardly. If you don't want me to start searching through your threads and pointing-out all of your typos that I do not otherwise feel the need to CHILDISHLY highlight, don't be a smartass. It was freaking 3 AM!


Nonsense. You could have sent me a PM to ask for clarifications and specify the site in PRIVATE.

You started ALL of the problems by:

1. Ignoring my clear-as-day statement, at the very begining of the post, that I am referring specifically to sites from Ukraine and Pakistan;

2. Choosing to post the domain publicly instead of sending me a PM.


How many times did I type "favorite"—once? Please stop trying to change focus by drawing attention to meaningless drivel that carries absolutely no significance for me or my argument.


LOL. I hate to break it to you, but when the name of a site does not exist in a thread, and you name the site, you name-dropped. That is a fact. Spin to your heart's content. (However, keep in mind that your entire argument is irrelevant, as I have already shown.)



The sky is blue! Oops, do I need to "prove" that "reckless" assertion to you, too? Wake up and smell the reality. I am the longest-standing member. I have contributed, by far, both the most posts and the most threads. I've also seen links to my numerous, in-depth investigations all over the Internet. In addition, people send me PMs constantly asking me for help (which I never provide if the requested help involves any form of recommendation or name-dropping). Finally, my investigations have been the basis for others' investigations, which, in turn, have brought—and continue to bring—valuable attention and traffic to EssayScam.org. Would you like to see that proof, as well, or are you going to accept common sense/knowledge?


WRONG, on multiple fronts:

1. Referring to John as "Mr. 2 Posts" after he attempted to rudely school me on the ins-and-outs of this forum is NOT an insult. It would have been an insult had I typed "stupid Mr. 2 Posts." Tell me—am I insulting myself if I refer to myself as "Mrs. 2352 Posts"? That's who I am, Mrs. 2352 Posts. Consider myself insulted.

2. The first insult was John's backhanded, "Just because I have a life . . ." comment.

3. The purported "insult" (which is not an insult at all) was NOT directed to you. However, that did not stop you from FIRST insulting me:

I won't stoop to your level here by responding in kind.


Please do so. I will easily explain why each is justified due to rule-breaking. Regardless, it's none of your business. Did I insult YOU in those posts? No.


Hail, the hypocrite speaks! Again, Lavinia, please get your own house in order before hypocritically chastising me. I'd like to draw your attention to the following, completely unprovoked, rude attack that you undertook against FreelanceWriter only 7 days ago:



Yet again, your argument is WEAK. I am not rude with anyone who follows the rules. If a member signs up just to engage in promotion/recommendation or ask for a recommendation/review, there's a good chance that I may be abrasive. Oh, well—if you don't want to get burnt, don't knowingly stick your hand in the fire!


One more time—weak. I generally avoid name-calling unless it's handed-out to me first.


I must thank you for finally making the blatantly false claim for which I have been patiently waiting. The thread is still very much alive, actually. Here's the first paragraph of the thread that you wrongly suggest has been deleted:

If, at any point thereafter in my thread you had a concern, you should have PM'd me. PERIOD.


Yes, thank you. I remembered the FACTS quite well. It's you who clearly needs a refresher. In fact, you have now proven to everyone that you are LYING about my statements. Not only are you LYING, you admittedly attempted, in advance, to make sure that it was "safe" for you to assert your LIE by first searching for the thread. When you somehow managed to NOT find the thread that does, in fact, still exist, you let loose with the LIE because you thought that I had no means to refute your LIE. Wrong. Sorry, but the witness is still alive. You lose.

I now invite you to stay the heck out of my business, keeping in-check your hypocritical scorn and false accusations. I'd prefer to spend my free time investigating and helping consumers instead of refuting your false accusations, misinterpretations, and overblown generalizations about how/why/when I post what I post.

*Done with the disso ^_^*


So when someone says that a site is crappy when your evidences point out that it's legit, that person is automatically competition posing as a client? A glaring logical flaw is clearly evident from the way you equate legitimacy to competence. Ir's like you're saying that the writers of all legitimate companies are brilliant and incapable of botching up assignments. That's an association that you NEVER EVER proved. ^_^


Oh wait, since I view you as a shameless ET supporter who always tries to parry away complaints of incompetence against the company by slapping evidences on legitimacy (not competence), then I guess all my insults against you are quite justified as well. :p

LMAO! That's an assertion that I have NEVER made, which explains why I have never attempted to prove it. You're grasping at straws and fabricating what you claim to be my position, as usual.


Wrong. When someone claims that a given site "is fraudulent," "ripped me off," or "is a scam" and I know that the truth (based on knowledge of the company's refund policies/procedures and a multitude of evidence) is the opposite, I'm going to voice that truth. If I know the claim to be based in fact, I either confirm it or post nothing.

There's a HUGE difference between the often illegal and blatantly deceptive BUSINESS MODEL that your employer champions and an occasional mishap by a legit writer from a legit company. Writers are human. You make errors. I make errors. Lavinia makes errors. What separates a fraudulent company from a legit company is whether those errors are made intentionally to deceive or accidentally and promptly corrected. I believe that Lavinia has echoed these sentiments to you in the past.


Can you please quote even ONE thread wherein I have mentioned ET without having first been goaded into it or specifically called-out? No, you can't, because it doesn't exist. Also, do you have ANY evidence that my assertions about legitimacy are false? No, you don't. You disagree with me just for the sake of disagreement. That's pathetic, and it makes me smile.

Oh but those can just equate to "they screwed up with my paper" and as pointed out by someone else, any client can feel "ripped off" if they don't get what they want out of a service. You immediately attack those posters saying that they are such clients.


Ok so for the record, ET being "legitimate" DOES NOT IMPLY THAT IT HAS AN EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH LEVEL OF COMPETENCE. Let's just make that CRYSTAL CLEAR. ^_^ They have good and bad writers as well.


I never disagreed that ET was legitimate. You can keep your legitimacy as it doesn't mean **** to me or my clients. ^_^

Ha! Once more you are trying to insinuate without proof that when a company lies about its location and the nationality of its writers, it is automatically a company that delivers shoddy output. We lie about our origins, big deal. The students we cater to lie to their universities about the authorship of their homework. Do we care? ^_^ Only sites like ET DON'T ALLOW THEIR CLIENTS TO CHEAT. :p

Firstly, a company that intentionally lies about its location, experience, and qualifications has NO LEGAL STANDING to do business AT ALL, having STOLEN from each consumer the RIGHT to make an informed purchasing decision.

Secondly, I and others have posted irrefutable proof that EssayWriters.net steals from and defrauds both customers AND writers. Dozens of different people have posted about EssayWriters.net's FRAUDULENT practices in this forum and on a multitude of other sites. Do you deny this fact? Do you deny the evidence posted by OTHER investigators that, in addition to breaking numerous state and federal laws in both the US and UK, EssayWriters.net creates FAKE, "customer" complaints in order to dock writers?

So we're the black market, fine. We're the only service that will not say it's wrong for you to hand papers we generate as yours coz heck, you bought them. We'll live with that.


'Course not, in fact I admit that EW's admin would take advantage of any opportunity to penalize its writers. All I'm saying is that if a company is off-shore or hires off-shore writers and lies to its clients regarding these matters, it DOES NOT automatically make that company inferior to others.

OK. I'll grant you that much, but only to a certain extent. Are you honestly suggesting that EW's average writer is anywhere near as sound as the average writer employed by the legitimate companies? (Try, just for a second, to remove YOURSELF from the equation, as I have already stated that you are the exception to the rule.)

Appreciate this........but am really curious to know HOW in the world you find the time to be here all the time. Its really difficult to believe that there is no financial design to benefit you, so that you spend ALL your valuable time arguing and defending on this forum.

As a freelance ESL writer I have my hands so full that despite the domestic help I have,(3 maids; something which is a luxury in the US) I find it difficult to do many things (like visiting the forum), leave alone arguing with every single prson who posts here!

Surely it doesn't require Bond's brain to see what I see. The focus which you display on this forum appears to be based on much more than firm belief!
Again, Its hard to believe that you are in NO Way associated with the writing industry. If you are not a writer and are not hired by an American writing industry to defend them or demean companies from other "poor" countries, why are you here?
I'm not saying you shouldn't be here, I'm simply asking you, so please don't get personal.

Dear WB,

Thank you so much for pointing out that the thread still exists so I have evidence.

For anyone who cares to read it, the thread is here:
http://www.essayscam.org/Forum/9_747_0.html

Your argument (which you were so kind to bold) was this:


As the statement above proves, you did not leave ANY room for the existence of legit companies that provide less than 300 words a page, which was MY ARGUMENT.

And then you concluded with:



Your conclusion, again, said nothing about the argument being specific to foreign ripoffs. You made a blanket statement to avoid any sites that only provide 225-275 words. The problem with your argument is that there are legit companies who do provide less then 300 words a page, proving that your guideline was clearly flawed.

Therefore, I was correct when I wrote this:


Folks can read the first post, the conclusion and the bolded argument , and the thread to see that I'm right and that you are obfuscating.

I won't hold my breath waiting for an apology for your calling me a liar. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt but it was obviously wasted.

I'm suggesting that nobody has the facts and figures to say one way or the other. Look at it this way, the only disgruntled EW writers that we ever see here are the ones who did plagiarize or write poorly or do anything else that could give EW the excuse to penalize their earnings. That shows that EW is quick to lose writers that are crappy, but how about writers that are good? Sure I'm the only one who openly admits writing for EW and not regretting it, but does that necessarily mean that I'm the only one who feels this way?

OooOoo, you got caught in a lie and now want it forgotten. That's funny.

I'm not "here all the time." I get alerts whenever the main forum page changes. Technology—try it.

As for your other question, I will not waste my time answering what I have already answered in the past. Sorry.

EW stop hijacking my argument with WB. Surely, you can argue in another thread!

No you aren't, there are members who have been around for longer.
Do I get to point out that you are lying?



And, by far, the most insults. I wonder what percentage of your posts are predominantly insults. 80%? 85%? That would be an interesting count.

I'm pretty sure you are the only member of this forum to threaten to send your husband to beat someone up too. What a great accomplishment!

It wasn't unprovoked or particularly rude. I told him to shut up because he once again used the forum to advertise his services. And he accused someone of lying with no evidence to back it up. He responded by calling me the C-Word. Note you didn't say anything to him about that.

But "shut up" = rude, huh? On a scale of 1-10, it was a 1, maybe a 2. How about we rate some of your comments. What about your physical threats against another poster, that has to be, what, an 8 at least? And animal names used to attack members of the forum? Seven?

Besides, we all know that if he didn't work for a company you deem legit (and have defended multiple times on this forum), you would have said much much worse.

LIE! Why do you conveniently leave out the entire first paragraph? Was that an accident? Hmmm . . . . Since you are now intentionally trying to hide that FACT that you LIED, here is the first paragraph in its ENTIRETY:


Then, towards the bottom of the SAME POST, I once again clarified that I was referring to sites in UKRAINE and PAKISTAN:



Now, here's your LIE:


Stop with the bullsh*t. You thought that the post was gone. You lied (trying to harm my credibility), and I proved it. You clearly stated that I never communicated that I was referring to sites based in Ukraine and Pakistan. You've left yourself with no credibility in this matter—none. Now you're trying to cover up your LIE about me by suggesting that I was referring to American sites simply because I did not qualify—for a THIRD time—in the last sentence. Give me a break.

Now you're just being silly. Quite frankly, you're embarrassing yourself. Your argument is lost. That's what happens when one gets caught red-handed in a LIE. TWO TIMES, in the same post, did I clarify that I was referring to sites from Ukraine and Pakistan, yet you LIED to everyone by stating as fact that I did not; therefore, you called me a liar FIRST. I merely showed people the TRUTH. You lied, and denying it only solidifies that you have a petty, personal grudge against me that compromises your objectivity.


Wrong. Did I state that "all" legit companies provide 300 words per page? No. Given that FACT, my statements allow for the presumption that there may be "legit" companies that provide less than 300 words per page. Therefore, in yet another way, your entire argument is utterly invalid.

I'm intentionally trying to hide the facts by posting the link to the thread for readers to see? You can't be serious.

People can read the posts and see that I'm not lying. You, however, continue to use your foul and abusive language, including profanity. You are breaking the fifth rule of this forum and should be banned or censured.

I was doing a bit of searching through the forums and found this bit of ironic wisdom.



See that? There is no excuse for breaking the rules, not even for you WB.

Well, I have been reading up on some back posts and I did find something else rather interesting. In the following quote, WB explains her personal definition of name-dropping:



So we're all clear on WB's definition of name-dropping right? If someone brings up the name of a site that doesn't already exist in the thread, that's name-dropping (according to WB).

So the title of this thread is "Graduate research, another fraudulent company."
http://www.essayscam.org/Forum/9_103_0.html#msg4025
Note: there is no company named in the title or the original thread.

Now, if you scroll a bit down, you find this post by WB:



Doh. Could it be WB that you are guilty of name dropping?

Note to WB: Maybe it's time for you to help the mod edit some of your own posts!

Prove it, if that makes you feel as though you've earned some sort of victory. Show me the member who has been posting for longer than me (as if that has anything at all to do with your lost argument).


I didn't realize that you needed my help. Plus, I like to devote my time to dealing with things that ACTUALLY MATTER, like protecting consumers.


True or not (and I really don't care, because I'm not here to "friend" people in Facebook), it's not any business of yours. Did I criticize you when you attacked FreelanceWriter without provocation? Nope. I figured it was none of my business. You should try it sometime.


Weak, very weak. You posted the link AFTER claiming that it DID NOT EXIST. I'm the one who posted the first paragraph to prove that you LIED. The fact that you posted the link AFTER me is irrelevant.


LMAO. Desperation at its finest! I could search for that thread to prove that the guy was CONSTANTLY threatening and insulting me with horrendously vulgar language before I typed something like, "If my husband were near you right near, he'd beat the living sh*t out of you." The guy deserved that and a lot more. If I recall correctly, most everyone (except the resident hecklers) was staunchly on my side. The guy was so bad that the mod eventually banned his entire account, which is EXTREMELY rare.


What? I don't think that he was a writer for ANY company, let alone a legit company.


LOL! Are you actually asserting that you did not lie about my position? Wow.


Really? Where have I used "foul and abusive language, including profanity" anywhere in this thread? Can I trouble you for a quote (as if it matters)?

Look, I understand that you miserably lost the main argument and are now trying to save face by attacking me in other, senseless ways. Knock yourself out. I really don't want to waste any more time on this nonsense. Feel free to keep going, if you feel that the responsible thing to do; I may or may not respond, depending on my mood and whether or not you type any more LIES.


You came after me, and you lost. You're just a frustrated, sore loser. Would you like some cheese with your whine?