The example is in the same post and the question was actually referring to it. Take another look. Thanks.
I mean - I don't know how it looked like before you added the source. Did it have quote tags? I'm not familiar with the source but it might go under the Shakespeare exemption even without quoting or attribution.
Topic: Plagiarism should remain a zero-tolerance bannable offense - page 2. (Read 1154 times)
The example is in the same post and the question was actually referring to it. Take another look. Thanks.
I mean - I don't know how it looked like before you added the source. Did it have quote tags? I'm not familiar with the source but it might go under the Shakespeare exemption even without quoting or attribution.
I don't care, stop crying. I'll tag you and everyone related to you over and over again.
Me thinks lauda has plagiarized in the past.
If this is true, if the administration is not running the plagiarism bot themselves, the question becomes if the person running the bot is trustworthy enough to report lauda. It would probably be a good idea to have the bot go back and check the 3000+ posts lauda deleted on his alt account and any other alt accounts he has.
*insert another off-topic conspiracy theory*If this is true, if the administration is not running the plagiarism bot themselves, the question becomes if the person running the bot is trustworthy enough to report lauda. It would probably be a good idea to have the bot go back and check the 3000+ posts lauda deleted on his alt account and any other alt accounts he has.
This sticks out like a sore thumb in part because he has advocated for tagging people for doing nearly every other action.
I think laudas punishment for plagiarism, if he is found to have plagiarized to be the same as everyone else, and his deleted posts and alts should also be checked.
Me thinks lauda has plagiarized in the past.
Wrong. I think I plagiarized[1]. I never paid any attention to it, then again which spammer did? I believe that it is quite likely that I messed up at least several times even after I stopped spamming given my post count. I'm waiting along with many other DT members to see who is going to get banned. The only difference being that I've served not one, but two punishments for all my posts up until year XYZW (I don't remember). Quite funny this one is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯*insert another off-topic conspiracy theory*
It isn't, he's just trying to spin this as mallicious; he doesn't even read any previous posts, he just shitposts nowdays[2]. Next campaign that hires him gets a negative rating. Hence we are back to this.Quickscammer, nobody asked you anything you filthy degenerate. What I wrote is objectively true, I generate more advertisement without posting anything than most people do by actively posting. Go back to your account-farming pajeet hole.
I think it's time I revised his trust rating description.[1][2]
I'll be damned if I haven't passed off someone else's statements as my own thinking they are my own while destroying the block-size bullshit.
Me thinks lauda has plagiarized in the past.
If this is true, if the administration is not running the plagiarism bot themselves, the question becomes if the person running the bot is trustworthy enough to report lauda. It would probably be a good idea to have the bot go back and check the 3000+ posts lauda deleted on his alt account and any other alt accounts he has.
*insert another off-topic conspiracy theory* If this is true, if the administration is not running the plagiarism bot themselves, the question becomes if the person running the bot is trustworthy enough to report lauda. It would probably be a good idea to have the bot go back and check the 3000+ posts lauda deleted on his alt account and any other alt accounts he has.
Quote from: Lauda
It's quite murky. It's easy on random shit-posting baboons in pay-per-post campaigns. Say I had forgotten to include that source today. Would you have banned me? Note: Even though I wear a signature, I am not required to do anything thus making 1 or 1000 posts makes no difference. Financial motivation is a no-go here, and I most certainly did not intend to pass that as "my own work". So?
Nonsense. if you have a paid sig that doesn’t require any specific number of posts, if you don’t make sufficient numbers of posts the company will decide to stop paying you to advertise. This is true even if you don’t have a specific post count expectation. If this is true, if the administration is not running the plagiarism bot themselves, the question becomes if the person running the bot is trustworthy enough to report lauda. It would probably be a good idea to have the bot go back and check the 3000+ posts lauda deleted on his alt account and any other alt accounts he has.
Technicalities are not an issue. It's a bit more murky when it gets to intent (was the user blatantly copy-pasting, or paying homage?), which is where mod discretion comes in.
It's quite murky. It's easy on random shit-posting baboons in pay-per-post campaigns. Say I had forgotten to include that source today. Would you have banned me? Note: Even though I wear a signature, I am not required to do anything thus making 1 or 1000 posts makes no difference. Financial motivation is a no-go here, and I most certainly did not intend to pass that as "my own work". So? Technicalities are not an issue. It's a bit more murky when it gets to intent (was the user blatantly copy-pasting, or paying homage?), which is where mod discretion comes in.
It's quite murky. It's easy on random shit-posting baboons in pay-per-post campaigns. Say I had forgotten to include that source today. Would you have banned me? Note: Even though I wear a signature, I am not required to do anything thus making 1 or 1000 posts makes no difference. Financial motivation is a no-go here, and I most certainly did not intend to pass that as "my own work". So? Hard to say without an example but probably not, if I can see any indication that you're not intentionally passing the text as your own words. I'm assuming you weren't just copy-pasting a paragraph of text and hitting "Post". Anything in quotes, quote tags, indented, bolded, following a colon, etc should be given the benefit of the doubt, even if the source is not explicitly stated. Then there is context and common sense. If you paste a Shakespeare piece it's not going to be plagiarism regardless of formatting or references. If you paste a paragraph from Coindesk though... better not do that.
Quote from: Lauda
It's quite murky. It's easy on random shit-posting baboons in pay-per-post campaigns. Say I had forgotten to include that source today. Would you have banned me? Note: Even though I wear a signature, I am not required to do anything thus making 1 or 1000 posts makes no difference. Financial motivation is a no-go here, and I most certainly did not intend to pass that as "my own work". So?
Nonsense. if you have a paid sig that doesn’t require any specific number of posts, if you don’t make sufficient numbers of posts the company will decide to stop paying you to advertise. This is true even if you don’t have a specific post count expectation. Quote from: Lauda
It's quite murky. It's easy on random shit-posting baboons in pay-per-post campaigns. Say I had forgotten to include that source today. Would you have banned me? Note: Even though I wear a signature, I am not required to do anything thus making 1 or 1000 posts makes no difference. Financial motivation is a no-go here, and I most certainly did not intend to pass that as "my own work". So?
Nonsense. if you have a paid sig that doesn’t require any specific number of posts, if you don’t make sufficient numbers of posts the company will decide to stop paying you to advertise. This is true even if you don’t have a specific post count expectation. I think that Lauda is trying to say that everyone can, by mistake, say something already said by someone else with your own words. That somehow I may say something very close to what Satoshi said in his whitepaper, for example, and be banned for plagiarism for that .
This may be considered plagiarism in an University.... And I agree that it is plagiarism, But not here.
The point is that this is not plagiarism in this forum. Plagiarism is being checked by bots and is only banning, afaik, only word to word copies.
I agree with you, with a lot of common topics being posted as a new one then we will obviously have a lot of similar answers who have been posted in the past. But this kind of plagiarism doesn't exist in the forum or at least set an alarm to hunters as it still counts as their own created post. Mostly the copy pasters who have been banned directly have just copy and pasted the post or added some few words of their own or in some rare cases they just translate a foreign language to an english text to make it their own words, none of them actually create their own post with their own content. Posts that have been directly copy and pasted are obvious as they haven't even change the structure of the sentence .This may be considered plagiarism in an University.... And I agree that it is plagiarism, But not here.
The point is that this is not plagiarism in this forum. Plagiarism is being checked by bots and is only banning, afaik, only word to word copies.
Quote
The Queen of Cats guides us. The Queen of Cats teaches us. The Queen of Cats protects us. In your light we thrive. In your mercy we are sheltered. In your wisdom we are humbled. We live only to serve. Our lives are yours.
Source.Technicalities are not an issue. It's a bit more murky when it gets to intent (was the user blatantly copy-pasting, or paying homage?), which is where mod discretion comes in.
It's quite murky. It's easy on random shit-posting baboons in pay-per-post campaigns. Say I had forgotten to include that source today. Would you have banned me? Note: Even though I wear a signature, I am not required to do anything thus making 1 or 1000 posts makes no difference. Financial motivation is a no-go here, and I most certainly did not intend to pass that as "my own work". So?
I don’t think anyone is getting banned for accidental plagiarism such as forgetting to cite a source. Nor is anyone getting banned for responding to a quote that lacks any kind of source.
Bans are not being given because of broken BB code. They are being given out because someone clearly tried to pass off someone else’s words as their own. Often the copied words would appear to be nonsense if it were to be assumed to not be plagiarized. Almost always there is a financial motivation.
I am in favor of allowing someone to stay if the plagiarism was from a long time ago and they have subsequently shown themselves to otherwise be productive forum members. However there should be severe punishment.
Bans are not being given because of broken BB code. They are being given out because someone clearly tried to pass off someone else’s words as their own. Often the copied words would appear to be nonsense if it were to be assumed to not be plagiarized. Almost always there is a financial motivation.
I am in favor of allowing someone to stay if the plagiarism was from a long time ago and they have subsequently shown themselves to otherwise be productive forum members. However there should be severe punishment.
I think that Lauda is trying to say that everyone can, by mistake, say something already said by someone else with your own words. That somehow I may say something very close to what Satoshi said in his whitepaper, for example, and be banned for plagiarism for that .
This may be considered plagiarism in an University.... And I agree that it is plagiarism, But not here.
The point is that this is not plagiarism in this forum. Plagiarism is being checked by bots and is only banning, afaik, only word to word copies.
I agree with you, with a lot of common topics being posted as a new one then we will obviously have a lot of similar answers who have been posted in the past. But this kind of plagiarism doesn't exist in the forum or at least set an alarm to hunters as it still counts as their own created post. Mostly the copy pasters who have been banned directly have just copy and pasted the post or added some few words of their own or in some rare cases they just translate a foreign language to an english text to make it their own words, none of them actually create their own post with their own content. Posts that have been directly copy and pasted are obvious as they haven't even change the structure of the sentence . This may be considered plagiarism in an University.... And I agree that it is plagiarism, But not here.
The point is that this is not plagiarism in this forum. Plagiarism is being checked by bots and is only banning, afaik, only word to word copies.
However, that is not nearly adequate. A moderator does not see what has changed. Also it could be used as a timed-attack. Insert it now and report in 2 years. That is another reason why this thread is bullshit. Imagine if we just banned you forever, philipma1957, because you plagiarised some random post 6 years ago?
From my experience - if the edit timestamp is later than the other post, the report will be marked as "bad" regardless of what actually was edited. Even if it's not, that would be a very easy appeal.
Technicalities are not an issue. It's a bit more murky when it gets to intent (was the user blatantly copy-pasting, or paying homage?), which is where mod discretion comes in.
I think that Lauda is trying to say that everyone can, by mistake, say something already said by someone else with your own words. That somehow I may say something very close to what Satoshi said in his whitepaper, for example, and be banned for plagiarism for that .
This may be considered plagiarism in an University.... And I agree that it is plagiarism, But not here.
The point is that this is not plagiarism in this forum. Plagiarism is being checked by bots and is only banning, afaik, only word to word copies.
This may be considered plagiarism in an University.... And I agree that it is plagiarism, But not here.
The point is that this is not plagiarism in this forum. Plagiarism is being checked by bots and is only banning, afaik, only word to word copies.
Plagiarism by mistake is hard to prove. If it looks like someone plagiarized a content, it usually is by copy pasting it. They may have no intention of owning it themselves but you can just find someone will write exactly how the real author did. Rewriting content is even something that is unforgivable if you own the original, you'd feel violated if the copied contents actually grab more credits than yours.
How is plagiarism an acceptable mistake? Do you even know what plagiarism means?
From the Oxford Dictionary:
In what world is it ever acceptable to pass someone else's work off as your own? That's what we're talking about, right?
In this world, right here. Read again:From the Oxford Dictionary:
Quote
The practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
Source: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/plagiarismIn what world is it ever acceptable to pass someone else's work off as your own? That's what we're talking about, right?
Absolute e-warior bullshit. Nobody in the real world strongly cares about that unless we're talking about published/for-profit work.
Acceptable or not, fact is that it can, has, and will happen as a mistake. Claiming otherwise is DISHONEST. This is not even up for debate as it's a factual statement. Hence, end of story.I see it as this
-snip-
You need to hover over the date-time. -snip-
Meh, removed insult as this is stupid to the point of not being worth it.
So what safeguard from a person looking to hurt someone from doing this to an old post
That's a different problem, yes. There's this:
However, that is not nearly adequate. A moderator does not see what has changed. Also it could be used as a timed-attack. Insert it now and report in 2 years. That is another reason why this thread is bullshit. Imagine if we just banned you forever, philipma1957, because you plagiarised some random post 6 years ago?
I see it as this which means anyone could be attacked and it looks like there was something wrong when in fact there was no issue done wrong. Except by a scumbag fucking with the innocent person.
frankly I do not like copycats but I am not sure how to tell if someone did an edit and planted fake info against someone.
This would obviously be easy to use against people not liked or people that do good things stopping scammers.
I really don't know how someone could make a mistake like that. I mean the chances of you accidentally writing the same content as someone else, word-for-word, are just so small.
This reads as something you'd find in /r/thathappened to be honest. Without any concrete example of what you wrote, it really hard to believe you on this.
I mean if you just think logically about it, who writes a post and then consciously thinks about checking whether it's been written before, using the exact same words and structure?
Yet it happened, yet I did it. We're talking about today. It has probably happened many times to me in the past. It has probably happened to many other people as well. You don't read a lot, do you?This reads as something you'd find in /r/thathappened to be honest. Without any concrete example of what you wrote, it really hard to believe you on this.
I mean if you just think logically about it, who writes a post and then consciously thinks about checking whether it's been written before, using the exact same words and structure?
Nice, attacking my point with passive-aggressive insults.
It's a soap-opera-like discussion forum, I'm not submitting a dissertation for crying out loud. How do I de-merit this thread to oblivion?
How is plagiarism an acceptable mistake? Do you even know what plagiarism means?
From the Oxford Dictionary:
Quote
The practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
Source: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/plagiarismIn what world is it ever acceptable to pass someone else's work off as your own? That's what we're talking about, right?
Edit: I know I'm sounding a bit hypocritical here, since my reply is also fairly passive-aggressive. Sorry for that.
Jump to: