Plagiarism... What is it and do you believe it's wrong?

[PubliusInfinitum]

I've recently run across a group of people who are prone to copy and paste paragraphs of information from various web sources; and while that's hardly unusual in a web forum; this crowd believes that doing so with absolutely NO DISCERNIBLE attribution; and representing such as one's OWN work... using such to fraudulently imply that such represents one's OWN command of the subject; towards establishing one's self as an authority on that subject is perfectly fine.

I'm just wondering what the member's of the USMB think about this....

Do you think that you understand plagiarism; and if so, what is that understanding; and if you feel that it's no big deal; please tell me why; and likewise for those who DO feel that plagiarism is a big deal.

Looking forward to you input.

Just trying to gauge the current conventional wisdom on the subject.

Thanks...

 

[THE LIGHT]

I've recently run across a group of people who are prone to copy and paste paragraphs of information from various web sources; and while that's hardly unusual in a web forum; this crowd believes that doing so with absolutely NO DISCERNIBLE attribution; and representing such as one's OWN work... using such to fraudulently imply that such represents one's OWN command of the subject; towards establishing one's self as an authority on that subject is perfectly fine.

I'm just wondering what the member's of the USMB think about this....

Do you think that you understand plagiarism; and if so, what is that understanding; and if you feel that it's no big deal; please tell me why; and likewise for those who DO feel that plagiarism is a big deal.

Looking forward to you input.

Just trying to gauge the current conventional wisdom on the subject.

Thanks...

Plagiarism would be if I copied and pasted your OP and started my own thread with it. .....hmmm...that sounds like a good idea...




















NO... plagiarism is BAD folks!!!

IMO

 

[tigerbob]

It has been written that plagiarism is the sincerest from of flattery. Interestingly, I don't know who coined that phrase, but I'm quoting it anyway.

Oh no, that's imitation isn't it? Bugger.

Never mind.

 

[RodISHI]

I don't know I have copied and pasted a lot of info in certain threads but, I take no credit for the information and link to the original article or informational website.

Copy paste does seem to po' some peoples.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I've recently run across a group of people who are prone to copy and paste paragraphs of information from various web sources; and while that's hardly unusual in a web forum; this crowd believes that doing so with absolutely NO DISCERNIBLE attribution; and representing such as one's OWN work... using such to fraudulently imply that such represents one's OWN command of the subject; towards establishing one's self as an authority on that subject is perfectly fine.

I'm just wondering what the member's of the USMB think about this....

Do you think that you understand plagiarism; and if so, what is that understanding; and if you feel that it's no big deal; please tell me why; and likewise for those who DO feel that plagiarism is a big deal.

Looking forward to you input.

Just trying to gauge the current conventional wisdom on the subject.

Thanks...

Plagiarism would be if I copied and pasted your OP and started my own thread with it. .....hmmm...that sounds like a good idea...




















NO... plagiarism is BAD folks!!!

IMO

What up Light? How's it hangin'?

That would actually be BRILLIANT!

Rhod... how are ya man? How's the family?

TB... good to see ya again...

Just to be clear; the point here is not so much the copy and paste, but doing so and pretending that it's one's own work... and not just failing to credit the author; but actually mixing the work into your own, literally to employ the work; the research of another as your own.

That's theft of someone's intellectual property... is it not?

And is it not also fraud?

I mean none of us are experts in every field... and we all lean on the research of scholars and those who've otherwise invested their time and energy; along with, in many cases their own money to establish and compile the resources we use in our various debates.

There's certainly nothing untoward or underhanded in using those resources... as long as one attributes the work to the author and / or the resource from which it was culled.

Like any fair exchange, most people who've placed data in the public domain, out it there for others to use... it there free for the taking; and all that anyone asks is that they attribute the work to the resource they created. You get the use of the work and the creator of the site; or the author receives the credit which they are rightfully due; for having provided it.

Where such is recognized and respected, it provides incentive for others to follow suit; the public domain is seen as a place where a person can place their work and receive the credit for the work. Thus the advancement of readily available knowledge PROGRESSES...

Where such is not recognized; and the authors and creators of such resources begin to see their work being represented by others as their own; this can only provide good reason for researchers and scholars to avoid the public domain... thus producing a REGRESSIVE effect.

Which is where the Irony rests in this situation; those who I've found to be the LEAST 'concerned' with Plagiarism are the would-be PROGRESSIVES...

I mean entire FORUMS; which proudly proclaim their "liberal" orientation, who show absolutely NO INTEREST OR CONCERN for Plagiarism... where it has been demonstrated that entire PARAGRAPHS were lifted and fraudulently represented as the work of the plagiarist...

It just proves to me that the Ideological Left is, for all intents and purposes, a vessel adrift from any sense of morality...

Just looking for some input on how others see it... and I'd be particularly interested in the opinion of those professing to be liberal, progressive, socialist, or even the rarest of all Leftists... the dreaded anarcho-communist...

 

[RadiomanATL]

Copying someone elses work, and presenting as your own is plagiarism and just plain damn dishonest in my book.

Pretty easy to spot though. Look for the string of sentences that are a bit more formal and articulate than is normal for this message board. Put it in google with " " around them. See if you get any hits.

And then call the person out on it.

 

[paperview]

One of the most glorified defenses of plagiarism came from a hard right here.

He lifted a full thing from Zell Miller and claimed it as his own:

look, here you are. and totally glossing over your plagiarism. zell miller would not approve.

at long last have you no decency?

...

Ideas are NOT palagerized. And does NOT make it any less relevant as you portend. I repeated words from another person, as anyone would do, as I subscribe to them.

This is a history lesson. And what I fronted is correct, and right, no matter HOW you characterize it, in YOUR attempt to asassinate the words, much less the idea. I am on the mark.

Your feeble attrempt to discount them. is noted, and IGNORED for posterity.

Hot damn is that precious or what?

 

[xotoxi]

At least on USMB, when someone

puts text in a quote box

it can generally be inferred that those words are not their own and that they are quoting someone else to make a point. There are many things found on the internet that are written anonymously, and it would be cumbersome to site every string of words that are written.

We are constantly hotlinking and posting images that are unsited.

 

[Ragnar]

As my old Poli-Sci Prof. used to say...

"Stealing from one source is plagiarism, stealing from many is scholarship."

Plagiarism is a very big deal in most cases. For example, in "real life", at your job and/or in any way for a marireal gain, in the process of your education etc...

It's a big deal on blogs too I think. Less so for smaller and smaller types of internet use an outside the legal fields for goofy stuff. Goofy equals: message board lies- innuindo (in your enndo), slander, jokes, memes, talking points etc)

It's always wrong but in lesser cases, IMO, that ranges from legal cases, big immoralities, shady character and on down to raised eyebrow and finally "meh" this person's not worth educating.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, the below post; rinsed of any links to the other forum; is the result of the second time in as many weeks wherein I busted the respective imbecile FLAGRANTLY plagiarizing...

Now I should point out that NOT ONE MEMBER OF THAT BOARD so much as criticized this practice... and this on a site Created BY LIBERALS... FOR LIBERALS...

Enjoy...

The Black Knight: Adagio: THE PLAGIARIZING ASSHAT, on 03 March 2010 - 04:05 PM, said:


Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring and totally irrational response, since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation.

Now compare that 'knowledge' which the AssHat explained to us; representing such as HER WORDS: HER COMMAND; HER MASTERY OF THE SUBJECT, to an explanation of the same subject from an obscure little website which specializes in the filing of various forms of fallacy...

Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation.

[URL="http://www.fallacyfiles.org/tuquoque.html"http://www.fallacyfiles.org/tuquoque.html]Click this Link to visit the Site from which Adagio SHAMELESSLY PLAGIARIZED; COPIED AND PASTED REFERENCE MATERIAL AS HER OWN THOUGHTS...[/URL]


Now IN HER NEXT BREATH; and in a rather ironic display of irrationality; THE SELF PROCLAIMED PAN-CRITICAL RATIONALIST: ADAGIO PASTES ANOTHER DEADPAN, UNADULTERATED RIPOFF...

The Black Knight: Adagio: THE PLAGIARIZING ASSHAT, on 03 March 2010 - 04:05 PM, said:If rationality lies in criticism rather than justification, and if we can subject everything to criticism and continuing test, including the rationalist way of life itself, then rationality is in this important sense unlimited. If all justification; rational as well as irrational, is truly abandoned, there is no need to justify irrationally a position that is rationally unjustifiable.

Taking just the first line and placing it in a google search... we find this:

The Philosophy of Karl Popper Part III. Rationality, Criticism ... http://www.browserde...pringerlink.com by WW Bartley - 1982 - Cited by 18 - Related articles
if rationality lies in criticism, and if everything - including the rationalist way of life itself is subject to criticism ...... s3 John T. Kearns: "A Semantics Based on Justification rather than Truth," ...
SpringerLink Home - Main -

She's a fraud... a mimic... a runaway DOUCHE...

And THIS, the latter example demonstrates that she is not the victim of an overly zealous opponent… who is trying to make hey out of an innocent, un-attributed reference.

THE LATTER EXAMPLE IS A LIFT WHICH SHE STOLE AND INTENTIONALLY MISREPRESENTED AS HER OWN WORK, FROM AN OBSCURE TOME WHICH SHE FOUND ON THE WEB...

AGAIN: SHE REPRESENTED ANOTHER PERSONS WORK; THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF ANOTHER HUMAN BEING AS HER OWN WORK...

INTENTIONALLY PRETENDING THAT THE WORK CREATED BY ANOTHER HUMAN BEING WAS HER OWN ...

PRETENDING THAT THE WORK OF OTHER PEOPLE; THE CREATION OF WHICH SHE HAD NO PART IN COMPILING AND REPRESENTING THAT FRAUD AS HER OWN COMMAND OF THE SUBJECT...


Classic, INDISPUTABLE FRAUD...

In the former example she came to demand last night, that according to Washington State University's website, she isn't required to attribute a source from dictionaries or commonly used encyclopedias...

Which is in and of itself a questionable policy... but one which nonetheless stands as their policy ...

She claims that this policy provides that she can freely take the verbatim quotes; entire paragraphs from reference material; and just mix it into her own work as if SHE WERE THE CREATOR OF THAT KNOWLEDGE... as if such was the result of HER WORK... HER OWN THINKING; HER OWN EFFORTS...

Now clearly, Washington State University does not imply that a student or faculty member can represent reference sources as their own work; as Adagio and her Comrades Gail and Ross demand it does....

It merely states that under certain conditions, wherein the audience is reasonably known to be sufficiently familiar with the subject; that they should be expected to recognize that such is being referenced; that attribution isn't critical...

But Fallacy Files.org is hardly Britannica or World Book... it is an obscure little website in which the creator of that site spent YEARS of his life compiling those files... and who spent his hard earned money and a great deal of his precious time to create a place where others could enjoy the fruits of his labor... and who only reasonably expects that where someone taps into the resource which HE CREATED... that the user simply attribute his site as the source; as would anyone...

And is that unreasonable? Should a person who has shared their research from decades of study, NOT BE PROVIDED SOME RECOGNITION WHEN A PERSON IS ALLOWED TO FREELY EXAMINE HIS RESEARCH and culls from that research that which is valuable to them? Is it not FAIR, does it not serve equality, that such an exchange result in profit to BOTH PARTIES? Apparently not where the Ideological Left is concerned... and go figure.

Adagio: the Plagiarizing ASSHAT ... feels that he should be allowed to lift the intellectual property created by others and represent THEIR work as HIS OWN... as does his progressive comrades; Ross and Gaily... And why is this?

Why, we're told; it's because the researcher has placed his work in the PUBLIC DOMAIN! Thus whatever research is IN THAT PUBLIC DOMAIN; ACCORDING TO LEFT-THINK... THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE FREE TO NOT ONLY USE THE INFORMATION TO FURTHER THEIR OWN KNOWLEDGE; BUT TO LIFT THE WORK DIRECTLY AS IT WAS WRITTEN AND PRESENT THAT WORK; THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF ANOTHER HUMAN BEING... AS THEIR OWN; TO REPRESENT THAT THEY DID THE WORK; THAT THEY SPENT DECADES COMPILING THOSE FILES... thus they demand that THEY are entitled to the inherent authority intrinsic to such a command of that knowledge...


[URL="http://www.fallacyfiles.org/whatarff.html"http://www.fallacyfiles.org/whatarff.html]Click here to read the Introduction of "The Fallacy Files:[/URL]

"I began collecting and studying logical fallacies about twenty-five years ago, when I first became interested in logic. ...

Some years after I began to amass these files, I wondered just what I ought eventually to do with them, how best to organize the information within them, and in what form to make them available to others interested in fallacy studies. The present hypertext web version, The Fallacy Files, was first published on March 11th, 2001, and is the result of this score of years of research and fieldwork on the fallacies."

And the creator of this valuable resource provided his research to the Public FOR FREE... But according to the representatives of the Ideological Left, THAT IS JUST NOT ENOUGH... they want to be able to LIFT HIS WORK VERBATIM, from his site and REPRESENT ALL THE YEARS OF RESEARCH WHICH THIS INDIVIDUAL PROVIDED TO THEM FOR FREE... AND REPRESENT THAT THEY CREATED THE WORK THEMSELVES... They can't just use the work to further their own understanding; work which was GIVEN TO THEM... That's NOT ENOUGH... It's TOO MUCH TO ASK that they should simply provide this site; this researcher, with a little credit; by simply attributing the work to HIM; WORK WHICH THEY DEEMED AS VALUABLE, THROUGH THEIR USE OF IT; but which they were uninterested in providing ANY LEVEL OF COMPENSATION...


Ya can't make this crap up KIDS... They're LIARS! Humanists with NO SENSE OF MORALITY WHAT SO EVER; They'll say anything; steal whatever they feel that they feel that they need, to get whatever it is that they happen to want at any given time...

Now you may feel that I've misrepresented the Left here... But the record is clear... it's been a week... Read back through this thread and FIND ANY EXAMPLE OF ANY LEFTIST so much as criticizing plagiarism... and bring it back as evidencce that I've overstated the case...

What you're going to find is that; AS PREDICTED; the would-be intellects of the Left of this board, either ignored this intellectual deceit; which is an advocacy by ommision; or they overtly took to demanding that because the information was within "the Public Domain" that it is perfectly acceptable to simply Copy and Paste someone elses work and represent it as their own... An act which is overtly immoral... An act which is culturally unsustainable; and a species of reasoning which will in the end; where such a notion becomes to be sufficiently accepted, result in people who do such research, being less likely to place their work in the Public Domain. Thus where the Public Domain is said to be beneficial or otherwise representing PROGRESS... the reasoning being advanced here BY THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT; can only result in the benefit of such a PROGRESSIVE policy being curtailed... thus this represents YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLICY RESULTING IN REGRESSION...

And all because their sorry asses are too damn lazy and so pathetically bereft of any sort of sound moral underpinnings... that they can't work up the moral character to simply GIVE CREDIT TO THOSE WHO OFFERED THEM THE BENEFIT OF THEIR LABOR...

Which is yet another example of the Ideological Left coming to claim the product of another's labor as THAT TO WHICH THEY ARE ENTITLED...



Demonstrating in finality the Unsound, Unsustainable Species of Reasoning that is: LEFT-THINK!

The question is, CAN WE GET SOME RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION GOING HERE?

Can I get an Amen?

 

[Si modo]

Plagiarists are thieves. When one quotes and/or uses the ideas of another without properly attributing those words and/or idea to the other, then they are presenting those words and/or ideas as their own. Thus, they are stealing.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Plagiarists are thieves. When one quotes and/or uses the ideas of another without properly attributing those words and/or idea to the other, then they are presenting those words and/or ideas as their own. Thus, they are stealing.

Well said...

 

[hjmick]

Would it be plagiarism if I were to copy the OP, correct the spelling and grammar, and then post it as my own...?

 

[Douger]

If some asshole posts something on the interweb it is a free for all.
FUCKEM.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Would it be plagiarism if I were to copy the OP, correct the spelling and grammar, and then post it as my own...?

Yes... It would...

Which begs the questions:

First; Would your response represent an impotent advocacy for plagiarism, through ommission?

And second; is there any more pathetic example of diversion, than those who run to point out spelling and grammar issues in text debate?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

If some asshole posts something on the interweb it is a free for all.
FUCKEM.

Ahhh...

So because something is sets on the table; with no one standing there to prevent you from taking it; you feel that this represents something to which you're entitled...

Ain't that interestin'?

And where that something was left there for you to use as ya will; you can't even find the character to attribute that gift, to the giver...

Tell us Doug; ... just curious; do you feel that you are also entitled to things like healthcare; housing, a good payin' job and... food?

 

[amrchaos]

Boy--PublI is really angry over a psuedo-intellects mastery of the "steal and paste".


That means, if I plagiarize Karl Marx and post it in this thread--PublI will turn into a planet buster!!


Is Everybody ready for the final count down??

 

[hjmick]

Would it be plagiarism if I were to copy the OP, correct the spelling and grammar, and then post it as my own...?

Yes... It would...

Which begs the questions:

First; Would your response represent an impotent advocacy for plagiarism, through ommission?

And second; is there any more pathetic example of diversion, than those who run to point out spelling and grammar issues in text debate?

Yes. Those who believe that spelling and grammar don't count in text debate. This is how we see each other, this is how we get an impression of one another. We make judgements of others based on what we read here. If you spell and construct sentences in a fashion in line with a third grader, it's hard to take you seriously.

This is especially true of spelling when you consider that almost every browser or tool bar has a spell checker.




Point of clarification, my use of the pronoun "you" is not meant to imply that I am referring to you specifically.

 

[tigerbob]

You is a pronoun?

 

[L.K.Eder]

You is a pronoun?

You are a pronoun.

dammit!