Job Discussion Forums

[Texas Chuckles]

You're not attacking or defaming? Really? And why all of a sudden are popping out from your box Jack?

Why didn't you attack my first post regarding CZZ? Not serious enough issues?

These phrases aren't attacking or insulting?:

"Practice for your first novel?"

"If all your going to do is post links to open blogs/forums, I'm sorry but that's not proof of anything. One person writing 10 different posts under 10 different names does not make something more believable."

"Putting words in my mouth...I simply asked you to back up what your saying and you just keep attacking my character instead."

"I use a screen name on this site to protect myself from people like you slandering myself or the school I work for."

You don't offer any real arguments you simply attack me and the post by raising weak questions. You also are grandstanding with this line:

"Here everybody watch this..."

Actually translates to : "Hey everybody watch me."

You are exactly like a person who gleefully walks into the middle of a crowd and starts swinging their arms around with clenched fists not because you're angry or making a statement but because just want to get as much attention as you can in the process harm as many people as possible.

You need to protect yourself in China? According to your statements and questions there's no need for protection. And you've never heard of any, any at all foreign teachers being scammed, cheated, blacklisted, beaten, or killed? I personally know a person from Belgium who was attacked and beaten by three nationals in Beijing and had to be hospitalized. I would imagine after you attack and defame FTs who openly complain about their horrible treatment you probably would have a long line of people waiting to confront you face to face.

You openly say your hiding your identity to protect yourself but you ask for "proof" or "evidence" that would endanger possibly myself and the others who are working to help foreign teachers. Again no real arguments just asking weak questions. Also genius the word your looking for is "libel" not "slander". It helps with your apparent lack of credibility if you use the correct terms.

"Putting words in my mouth..."

Your use of terms such as "proof", "evidence", "slander". These are legal terminology persons with weak arguments use to strengthen points that aren't really there.

"Let me guess, your retort will be along the lines of "That's not my job, do your own legwork" ".

You haven't done any legwork or research or you would have a different slant on the postings.

"You spent way too much to get here. One way ticket is under a grand and visas and everything else should only cost you a couple hundred. Over exaggeration doesn't make you more believable. "

Not an attack? Really? The amount spent depends on the timing of the booking and origination of the travel. Everyone reading your post knows this which actually weakens your diatribe. Again no real point or argument just asking weak questions.

"Huh? The consulate purchased a plane ticket for you? Really? I'm sure you'd have to have some kind of evidence from that, some sort of official form or something of the like then."

This statement is stupid beyond all comprehension. The U.S. consulate offering public information on an emergency rescue of a United States citizen? But then again you have done no legwork or research? Yes?

"My wife does the same thing. She's Chinese but took on an English name. Sometimes she uses her full Chinese name, but sometimes she uses a mix of both. Sometimes she changes using her family name or given name depending on the day of the week because both sound nice together." "It's not that weird."

Not weird for a regular person but a CEO who uses three identities with a sordid history while running a teaching recruiting agency it's devious and deceptive. And please show us proof of your wifes' name in a mix of names. Oh no wait that would put your wife possibly in DANGER. I don't want anybody to be in danger not even you.

The bulk of your questions all have the same theme: Things that would be "word-of-mouth" or communications that would endanger people.
Also taking pics at a police station of documents would not be allowed and yes you should know this. If pics of apartments were provided your argument would be "phony pics of apartment".

There's a word for people like you who hide behind a computer and attack and attempt to defame or belittle others who are having troubles or suffering. The word is: COWARD.

Just a slice of intention that what you're doing is honest and decent.
Just a slice is all I ask.

Don't bother answering I'm not interested in your "face saving" blather.
And yes now I am attacking your obvious lack of character and decency.

[asiannationmc]

You have kind of lost steam as no one will remember what the OP was about.

[The_Kong]

[asiannationmc]

I told you. Now it is all about who said what.

[Texas Chuckles]

A) Person makes claim.

B) Person rebutting asks specific questions with points and does research
to either back up his points or to find out if there's validity to the claim.

C) Person rebutting claims he has no ties to organization being taken to
task but goes to great lengths in debating issues where he has no
specific questions but vague references to proof and makes general
allegations that the person making the complaints has none.
The person who goes to such lengths must have a vested interest in
the organization.

D) Person rebutting claim resorts to belittling or attacking the person
the claim because he still has done no research, legwork, and still
cannot ask questions with a point or substance:

"Practice for your first novel?"

"If all your going to do is post links to open blogs/forums, I'm sorry but that's not proof of anything. One person writing 10 different posts under 10 different names does not make something more believable."

"You spent way too much to get here. One way ticket is under a grand and visas and everything else should only cost you a couple hundred. Over exaggeration doesn't make you more believable"

"Huh? The consulate purchased a plane ticket for you? Really? I'm sure you'd have to have some kind of evidence from that, some sort of official form or something of the like then."

"Attacking me instead of providing proof, good work, that should help with your credibility."

"I use a screen name on this site to protect myself from people like you slandering myself or the school I work for."

E) Person rebutting grandstands with "Here everybody watch this..."
Actually translates to : "Hey everybody watch me."

F) Person rebutting has no evidence for rebuttal, continues to flail with his fists in a crowd continuing to hurt and harm all around him. He also would ask all involved to open themselves to attack or dangers with no risk to himself.

G) Person rebutting regales himself by victimizing the victims without
decency or consideration and claims to be a victim.

H) Person rebutting continues to use legalese to bolster an argument
because again and again he has done no research, legwork, and does
not ask questions with a point or substance.

I) Person rebutting already revealing that he has a vested interest in the
organization which is becoming a pariah also reveals that if he somehow
can make himself out to be a victim his argument will be proved.

Next

[The_Kong]

Weren't you not going to respond to my 'face-saving blather’?