I checked it; it was the first hit google gave. It was good, nothing special. There should have been more examples. Having said that that is why I prefer sites such as speech accent archive or the international dialects of English archive (IDEA).

Oxford suggests that it might have been originated from a university joke, or as a parody of some Latin term of schools around 17th or 18th century.

If so, EF surely has got a landslide victory over me. I always go to 'Business and Finance English' since its place changes with the linguistic discussion

Well, I'm not sure does anyone use 'in despite of' meaning 'in defiance of' anymore. I guess it is a bit archaic but still possible; at least in novels, for example. I guess people would be frowning ( ) a lot if encountered

No difference in meaning, although, some people prefer 'despite' in formal texts. Please notice that it is 'despite' in this context , not 'despite of'. Despite the weather, we went out. Cf. In spite of the weather, we went

Yes, I was also going to mention that v/w confusion. I've also struggled quite a lot with that since my native language really doesn't distinguish the difference between them. Luckily, I make that mistake extremely rarely nowadays.

Like I said this is not a complaint but an observation with an interrogatory ambience. The section 'English for specific reasons' behaves strangely. I mean yesterday 'Linguistic Discussion Forum' situated on the upper left corner

The quality now, indeed, is better compared to the first one. You have, as MM mentioned, a clear Slavic accent. However, that doesn't render your speech incomprehensible and that is the most important thing when dealing with languages, that

You tell me I, for one, am not good at creating new topics. Regarding topics, on the other hand: I will normally contribute if I have something to add, and the topic, in general, interests me.

I believe this extract I have refers to tankers.It should be something that would convey the idea that the tankers are not safe to use anymore, that is, they are a risk both the staff and to nature. I guess I'm looking for a nice adjective, or