I wouldn't consider this grounds for a ban or anything, though I do think the member ought to be schooled as to how to properly cite his source. The way he did it isn't just lazy, it's the absolute wrong way to cite a website from which you're quoting something. The right way to do it is to provide a link to the exact page the quote comes from. This should be obvious, but who knows what level of education this knucklehead has, not to mention where his moral compass points.
That's my opinion, but I could see how others might think this is at least borderline plagiarism. I just don't think it goes that far, because he did make it somewhat clear that he isn't the original author of the post.
Agree with everything you said. Doesn't deserve a ban in my opinion, but someone should warn them about how to properly quote and source something if they haven't been already. If all his posts were just him sharing copied material (even with sources) I would usually just warn them about that. Not really much point in you being here if you're just sharing articles for the sake of it and it is usually just done as a way to get away with legalised copy and pasting.
That is plagiarism, you can't use a whole of text even if you indicate the source, he or she does not even own a one sentence in the post, that's purely plagiarism.
''copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)'' plagiarism.org
Yes, in a scientific world, it is considered as a plagiarism even if we did add the fully reference of the source. To make it as "not plagiarism" thing, one must make the work based on his own word even though he refer to other articles or news, and then you still must add the source.
I believe even in the internet world, it is still a plagiarism, and should lead to a punishment.
It's not plagiarism if you site your source, which he did.
the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
You're not really trying to pass the work off as your own if you provide the source, but in this case it wasn't done properly (or lazily).
