What makes Worlda rather peculiar is that they always launch damage limitation campaigns at times when they are probably struggling to recruit teachers for the next semester. Other shit schools seem to merely adapt a reactive approach and respond whenever they receive criticism (whether fair or unfair). Worlda on the other hand, is far more proactive in nature; they actually anticipate bad reviews. Hence my previous jokes about their 'Christmas special' and so on.

The fake reviews follow a few different patterns and I am not entirely sure which pattern it is that I would consider to be the most amusing. Chinglish reviews always make us giggle; but I have noticed a pattern where there is a lot of excessive praise written in the first part of a fake review; then a token bit of criticism or a suggestion features at the end. You don't need to be some kind of detective to understand what is going on there.

However, they seem to be adopting confusion tactics now. They may make threats against 'Scam Knight' for posting evidence of wrong doing and subsequently prove what a sinister organization they really are in the process. Are they realistically going to be able to make similar threats against a national government that had already made information about one of their former teachers accessible to the public? I doubt it. Confusion tactics are all that they probably have left.

Maybe Paul Fox's suggestions about not responding to such morons are quite valid.