Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I don't think cheating on your school work should be your first choice - how will that help you learn? To improve your English vocabulary and grammar skills you need to do the work yourself, make mistakes (which is fine - that's how you learn) and improve. If you don't understand a point, I would urge you to ask your English teacher and to say you don't understand and I would have thought they will explain things to you and maybe try to line up some extra help in areas you find difficult. Also, explain this to your parents - they should help you as well. Good luck - I hope it goes well. Keep trying!
If you get someone to write your essay then you will be cheating (plagiarism) - cheating those in your place of education and cheating yourself. It is fine to ask for advice and guidance - that's what education is about - you learn from others and then apply your learning. But using someone else to write your coursework is something which, if discovered by e.g. a university, could lead to your expulsion from the course. And rightly so. Any qualification you otherwise gain will not be yours but the essay writer's. How would you feel if you found yourself being treated by a doctor who had got someone else to sit his/ her exams and do his/ her course work? Reassured? Happy?
If it is I hope potential customers are reading these responses. Cheating is shameful. Anyone who proposes cheating should be ashamed. Anyone offering cheating services leaves their clients open to significant sanctions if discovered. Universities, certainly, are using increasingly sophisticated methods to identify plagiarism. Luckily the 'coursework' elements of many secondary qualifications are being reviewed and reduced.

If it is a spam advert I don't think much of the level of spelling/grammar they're providing!


Presumably they were intending (if it's spam) to address a demographic which needed help. A perfectly drafted request might have led one to wonder why help was needed. This one makes it perfectly clear. If it is 'secret spam' it is actually good secret spam on that account, and maybe well targeted. Except the ED Forum probably has relatively few potential customers for the service as its readers. So actually, well targeted in terms of content, but not in terms of channel.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • He's always been clear he'd rather be elsewhere than Westminster: https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/2024/06/18/starmer-davos-interview/ "Westminster is too constrained. It’s closed and we’re not having meaning. Once you get out of Westminster whether it’s Davos or anywhere else, you actually engage with people that you can see working with in the future. Westminster is just a tribal shouting place."   That's who he is.
    • These are the times he used the word "fight", in context. And Rudy [Giuliani], you did a great job. He’s got guts. You know what? He’s got guts, unlike a lot of people in the Republican Party. He’s got guts. He fights. He fights, and I’ll tell you.   ... For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans, and that’s what they are. There’s so many weak Republicans. We have great ones, Jim Jordan, and some of these guys. They’re out there fighting. The House guys are fighting, but it’s incredible. ... Did you see the other day where Joe Biden said, “I want to get rid of the America First policy”? What’s that all about, get rid of -- how do you say, “I want to get rid of America First”? Even if you’re going to do it, don’t talk about it, right? Unbelievable, what we have to go through, what we have to go through, and you have to get your people to fight. And if they don’t fight, we have to primary the hell out of the ones that don’t fight. You primary them. We’re going to let you know who they are. I can already tell you, frankly. ... Republicans are constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back. It’s like a boxer, and we want to be so nice. We want to be so respectful of everybody, including bad people. And we’re going to have to fight much harder, and Mike Pence is going to have to come through for us. ... And we were going to sit home and watch a big victory. And everybody had us down for a victory. It was going to be great. And now we’re out here fighting. ... [ I GUESS THE BBC REALLY COULDN'T USE THIS ONE:] The American people do not believe the corrupt fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But it used to be that they’d argue with me, I’d fight. So I’d fight, they’d fight. I’d fight, they’d fight. Boop-boop. You’d believe me, you’d believe them. Somebody comes out. You know. They had their point of view, I had my point of view. But you’d have an argument. Now what they do is they go silent. It’s called suppression. And that’s what happens in a communist country. That’s what they do. They suppress. You don’t fight with them anymore, unless it’s a bad story. ... With your help over the last four years, we built the greatest political movement in the history of our country and nobody even challenges that. I say that over and over, and I never get challenged by the fake news, and they challenge almost everything we say. But our fight against the big donors, big media, big tech and others is just getting started. ... Our brightest days are before us. Our greatest achievements still wait. I think one of our great achievements will be election security because nobody until I came along, had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9:00 in the evening and say, “I want to thank you very much,” and they go off to some other life, but I said, “Something’s wrong here. Something’s really wrong. Can’t have happened.” And we fight. We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.
    • Saying the election had been stolen was pretty provocative wouldn't you say? Pardoning the rioters would suggest that he agreed with them.  Wouldn't you say? Being an apologist for leaders of a country who execute political enemies, is a sad reflection of civilisation.  Wouldn't you say? Whether the above stands up in a court of law is another question but surely it is obvious to most of us.
    • "His speech did repeatedly call on people to fight."   If that were true there would have been no need for the BBC to splice together two sections of his speech that were uttered 53 minutes apart. They could have just used a clip from one of the times he actually said it. If it were true.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...