What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

What fraction of timschochet's posts are blatantly plagiarized? (1 Viewer)

Please indicate your best estimate

  • 100% - it's all lifted from somewhere else

    Votes: 21 15.3%
  • 80-99%

    Votes: 34 24.8%
  • 60-79%

    Votes: 27 19.7%
  • 40-59%

    Votes: 18 13.1%
  • 20-39%

    Votes: 13 9.5%
  • 1-19%

    Votes: 11 8.0%
  • 0% - it's still real to me

    Votes: 13 9.5%

  • Total voters
    137
Great moments in FFA plagiarism history

ThomasA lifts his entry from another source in the Smack Off Tournament. Shamed, he abruptly leaves the board and is never heard from again.

bueno engages yours truly in a political argument and manages to lift a few paragraphs from Ann Coulter. Called out by an unlikely source, he lacks contrition and suggests that Ann's ideas weren't that original anyway.

Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."

timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
That notebook will someday be in the Smithsonian.
 
Here's what I think.

Content scraping is a phenomenon of copying and pasting material from Internet websites, affecting both established sites[59] and blogs.[60]

Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism,[61][62] and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.

Plagiarism is not only the mere copying of text, but also the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.

 
Here's what I think.Content scraping is a phenomenon of copying and pasting material from Internet websites, affecting both established sites[59] and blogs.[60]Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism,[61][62]
:lmao:
 
'Mr. Pickles said:
<br /><a href='http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=592154&view=findpost&p=13161566' class='bbc_url' title=''>scathing example</a><br />
<br /><br /><br /> :rolleyes:

You think that's plagaism? It's that inability to remain unbiased that will keep you from ever becoming FFA Ombudsman.
Why don't you come back when you're sober.
:lmao: :lmao:
 
From the bottom of my heart I just want to say:

Nothing is said which has not been said before.

and,

About the most originality that any writer can hope to achieve honestly is to steal with good judgment.

and,

Genius Borrows nobly.

and,

When a thing has been said and said well, have no scruple. Take it and copy it.

So, yeah... that's what I think.

 
'Mr. Pickles said:
Great moments in FFA plagiarism history

ThomasA lifts his entry from another source in the Smack Off Tournament. Shamed, he abruptly leaves the board and is never heard from again.

bueno engages yours truly in a political argument and manages to lift a few paragraphs from Ann Coulter. Called out by an unlikely source, he lacks contrition and suggests that Ann's ideas weren't that original anyway.

Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."

timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
Great list, but you need to add Jackstraw too. He was plagiarizing all over the place in this thread starting here: Link. Worst kind too....the "personal", heart-wrenching anecdote.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'Mr. Pickles said:
Great moments in FFA plagiarism history

ThomasA lifts his entry from another source in the Smack Off Tournament. Shamed, he abruptly leaves the board and is never heard from again.

bueno engages yours truly in a political argument and manages to lift a few paragraphs from Ann Coulter. Called out by an unlikely source, he lacks contrition and suggests that Ann's ideas weren't that original anyway.

Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."

timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
Great list, but you need to add Jackstraw too. He was plagiarizing all over the place in this thread starting here: Link. Worst kind too....the "personal", heart-wrenching anecdote.
That example isn't as clear to me. I'm not sure if he was meaning to represent those stories as his own. Mr. Schochet was moved by those posts and din't have a clue they might have been from somewhere else. Maybe that's part of the problem.From a little later in that thread:

Right. I'm pro-choice but anti-timschochet.
 
'Mr. Pickles said:
<br /><a href='http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=592154&view=findpost&p=13161566' class='bbc_url' title=''>scathing example</a><br />
<br /><br /><br /> :rolleyes:

You think that's plagaism? It's that inability to remain unbiased that will keep you from ever becoming FFA Ombudsman.
Why don't you come back when you're sober.
:lmao: :lmao:
:lmao: :lmao:
 
ThomasA! I was about to ask who the smack off plagiarist was! Man, those were the days. Would a sanctioned smack off even come close to happening these days?

He really has never returned?

 
Great moments in FFA plagiarism history

ThomasA lifts his entry from another source in the Smack Off Tournament. Shamed, he abruptly leaves the board and is never heard from again.

bueno engages yours truly in a political argument and manages to lift a few paragraphs from Ann Coulter. Called out by an unlikely source, he lacks contrition and suggests that Ann's ideas weren't that original anyway.

Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."

timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll

 
Great moments in FFA plagiarism history

ThomasA lifts his entry from another source in the Smack Off Tournament. Shamed, he abruptly leaves the board and is never heard from again.

bueno engages yours truly in a political argument and manages to lift a few paragraphs from Ann Coulter. Called out by an unlikely source, he lacks contrition and suggests that Ann's ideas weren't that original anyway.

Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."

timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
:goodposting:
 
'Mr. Pickles said:
<br /><a href='http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=592154&view=findpost&p=13161566' class='bbc_url' title=''>scathing example</a><br />
<br /><br /><br /> :rolleyes:

You think that's plagaism? It's that inability to remain unbiased that will keep you from ever becoming FFA Ombudsman.
Why don't you come back when you're sober.
He is.
 
'Mr. Pickles said:
Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."
Was this the "Let's talk chemical* engineering!" thing?*or something.

 
As an author, I'm offended by content aggregators like Mr. Schochet.
I'm not trying to publish anything, Mr. Kim Chee.
It isn't easy to make so many diligent and comprehensive posts on so many complex and significant topics without having a little bit of plagiarism creep in (I voted 1-19%). Tim's motives are more altruistic than selfish. I'm not sure anyone could direct his threads any better.
 
'Mr. Pickles said:
Konotay (aka golddigger), engaged in a debate bloodbath regarding evolution, feels overwhelmed and resorts to posting some drivel by a guy at the Discovery Institute as his own ideas. In a manner eerily similar to bueno, he lashes out at his accusers and proclaims that he got too lazy to type up something similar himself. This of course coming in the wake of claiming that he never even cites the Discovery Institute much less steals their stuff. Konotay decides that MasterOfOrion is his least sullied alias and rolls with that from then on. He also makes wild accusations about various posters being a "Pickles alias."
Was this the "Let's talk chemical* engineering!" thing?*or something.
Yes.
 
From the FAQ:

16. Posting links to copyrighted materialMembers need to employ "fair use" quoting with proper credit and attribution from pieces ("fair use" guidelines are available for free at this link), and/or the inclusion of links to the full texts of articles. Both are meaningful and appropriate ways to give readers access to material. Most sites are fine with quoting pieces (quotes) of articles, but copying and pasting entire articles is rarely acceptable.
Permaban seems appropriate. I think Pickles may have found a way to free us from the era of Tim and put this whole ugly thing behind us.
 
As an author, I'm offended by content aggregators like Mr. Schochet.
I'm not trying to publish anything, Mr. Kim Chee.
It isn't easy to make so many diligent and comprehensive posts on so many complex and significant topics without having a little bit of plagiarism creep in (I voted 1-19%). Tim's motives are more altruistic than selfish. I'm not sure anyone could direct his threads any better.
I'm sure just about anyone could, but most would have the sense not to start them.
 
If you must write prose and poems the words you use should be your own. Don't plagiarise or take "on loan". There's always someone, somewhere with a big nose, who knows, and who trips you up and laughs when you fall.

 
'timschochet said:
'Mr. Pickles said:
timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
In both the World War II and and Civil War threads, the sources I used can be found in the opening post. With very few exceptions, I transcribed directly out of books which I noted, and sometimes added my own commentary. I wrote of my intention to do it up front, and very rarely have I ever used internet sources. The only reason that I used internet sources on the rock and roll thread is because my source book hadn't arrived yet. Now that it has, I don't expect to use the internet again. If I do I will note it.But the narrative threads are meant to be fun, informative and platforms for discussion, nothing more. I have never tried to represent this stuff as my own, and I never will.
By not listing your sources at the end of each post, the bolded is pretty well what you are doing. By not sourcing each post you're leaving the perception to all the people who didn't read the first post that all of your writing is completely your own work.To be frank, I really don't see why you have such a problem with sourcing each of your posts; doing so doesn't even threaten any of your goals of creating a fun and informative platform for discussion.

 
'timschochet said:
'Mr. Pickles said:
timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
In both the World War II and and Civil War threads, the sources I used can be found in the opening post. With very few exceptions, I transcribed directly out of books which I noted, and sometimes added my own commentary. I wrote of my intention to do it up front, and very rarely have I ever used internet sources. The only reason that I used internet sources on the rock and roll thread is because my source book hadn't arrived yet. Now that it has, I don't expect to use the internet again. If I do I will note it.But the narrative threads are meant to be fun, informative and platforms for discussion, nothing more. I have never tried to represent this stuff as my own, and I never will.
By not listing your sources at the end of each post, the bolded is pretty well what you are doing. By not sourcing each post you're leaving the perception to all the people who didn't read the first post that all of your writing is completely your own work.To be frank, I really don't see why you have such a problem with sourcing each of your posts; doing so doesn't even threaten any of your goals of creating a fun and informative platform for discussion.
It's because I hardly ever even do it. For instance, for the rest of the rock and roll thread, I'm going to be using ONE source. Am I supposed to start every post with "From the book, Rock of Ages"?? How absurd! And it's not even accurate, because as I already pointed out, I often add my own thoughts from time to time. I'm amazed that anyone thinks this is a big deal anyhow. The purpose of those narrative threads is not to show how smart I am, it's to discuss topics which interest me and which I hope interest others. Most of the people ripping me here are the same ones who seem to always want to criticize me for starting those threads. Now they're criticizing me for the material I choose to put in those threads. If they find the threads as dull as they claim, why are they bothering to read them?

 
'timschochet said:
'Mr. Pickles said:
timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
In both the World War II and and Civil War threads, the sources I used can be found in the opening post. With very few exceptions, I transcribed directly out of books which I noted, and sometimes added my own commentary. I wrote of my intention to do it up front, and very rarely have I ever used internet sources. The only reason that I used internet sources on the rock and roll thread is because my source book hadn't arrived yet. Now that it has, I don't expect to use the internet again. If I do I will note it.But the narrative threads are meant to be fun, informative and platforms for discussion, nothing more. I have never tried to represent this stuff as my own, and I never will.
By not listing your sources at the end of each post, the bolded is pretty well what you are doing. By not sourcing each post you're leaving the perception to all the people who didn't read the first post that all of your writing is completely your own work.To be frank, I really don't see why you have such a problem with sourcing each of your posts; doing so doesn't even threaten any of your goals of creating a fun and informative platform for discussion.
It's because I hardly ever even do it. For instance, for the rest of the rock and roll thread, I'm going to be using ONE source. Am I supposed to start every post with "From the book, Rock of Ages"?? How absurd! And it's not even accurate, because as I already pointed out, I often add my own thoughts from time to time. I'm amazed that anyone thinks this is a big deal anyhow. The purpose of those narrative threads is not to show how smart I am, it's to discuss topics which interest me and which I hope interest others. Most of the people ripping me here are the same ones who seem to always want to criticize me for starting those threads. Now they're criticizing me for the material I choose to put in those threads. If they find the threads as dull as they claim, why are they bothering to read them?
with full attribution to shuke:

OH, BULL####!!!

you're the second biggest narcissist on this board (or, if Pickles is to be believed, you're both of them).

 
'timschochet said:
'Mr. Pickles said:
timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
In both the World War II and and Civil War threads, the sources I used can be found in the opening post. With very few exceptions, I transcribed directly out of books which I noted, and sometimes added my own commentary. I wrote of my intention to do it up front, and very rarely have I ever used internet sources. The only reason that I used internet sources on the rock and roll thread is because my source book hadn't arrived yet. Now that it has, I don't expect to use the internet again. If I do I will note it.But the narrative threads are meant to be fun, informative and platforms for discussion, nothing more. I have never tried to represent this stuff as my own, and I never will.
By not listing your sources at the end of each post, the bolded is pretty well what you are doing. By not sourcing each post you're leaving the perception to all the people who didn't read the first post that all of your writing is completely your own work.To be frank, I really don't see why you have such a problem with sourcing each of your posts; doing so doesn't even threaten any of your goals of creating a fun and informative platform for discussion.
It's because I hardly ever even do it. For instance, for the rest of the rock and roll thread, I'm going to be using ONE source. Am I supposed to start every post with "From the book, Rock of Ages"?? How absurd! And it's not even accurate, because as I already pointed out, I often add my own thoughts from time to time. I'm amazed that anyone thinks this is a big deal anyhow. The purpose of those narrative threads is not to show how smart I am, it's to discuss topics which interest me and which I hope interest others. Most of the people ripping me here are the same ones who seem to always want to criticize me for starting those threads. Now they're criticizing me for the material I choose to put in those threads. If they find the threads as dull as they claim, why are they bothering to read them?
with full attribution to shuke:

OH, BULL####!!!

you're the second biggest narcissist on this board (or, if Pickles is to be believed, you're both of them).
If I'm Mr. Ham, then I'm also schizophrenic. :unsure:

 
i'm a grade A d-bag but i've spent 13 years here providing links to crap i use to frame my arguments. that's just part of being on the internet, its a well known rule to give attribution. hell, even scumbags on tumblr reference where they stole their stupid pics from.

 
'timschochet said:
'Mr. Pickles said:
timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
In both the World War II and and Civil War threads, the sources I used can be found in the opening post. With very few exceptions, I transcribed directly out of books which I noted, and sometimes added my own commentary. I wrote of my intention to do it up front, and very rarely have I ever used internet sources. The only reason that I used internet sources on the rock and roll thread is because my source book hadn't arrived yet. Now that it has, I don't expect to use the internet again. If I do I will note it.But the narrative threads are meant to be fun, informative and platforms for discussion, nothing more. I have never tried to represent this stuff as my own, and I never will.
By not listing your sources at the end of each post, the bolded is pretty well what you are doing. By not sourcing each post you're leaving the perception to all the people who didn't read the first post that all of your writing is completely your own work.To be frank, I really don't see why you have such a problem with sourcing each of your posts; doing so doesn't even threaten any of your goals of creating a fun and informative platform for discussion.
It's because I hardly ever even do it. For instance, for the rest of the rock and roll thread, I'm going to be using ONE source. Am I supposed to start every post with "From the book, Rock of Ages"?? How absurd! And it's not even accurate, because as I already pointed out, I often add my own thoughts from time to time. I'm amazed that anyone thinks this is a big deal anyhow. The purpose of those narrative threads is not to show how smart I am, it's to discuss topics which interest me and which I hope interest others. Most of the people ripping me here are the same ones who seem to always want to criticize me for starting those threads. Now they're criticizing me for the material I choose to put in those threads. If they find the threads as dull as they claim, why are they bothering to read them?
with full attribution to shuke:

OH, BULL####!!!

you're the second biggest narcissist on this board (or, if Pickles is to be believed, you're both of them).
If I'm Mr. Ham, then I'm also schizophrenic. :unsure:
this wouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
 
I'm thinking of doing my own translation of the Bible, but with a few of my own thoughts tossed in there. I'll let you figure out which ones.

Here goes:

Genesis, Chapter One

Author: God

[*]Early one morning, God was feeling really motivated and created the heaven and the earth.

[*]And the earth was without form, like a big ball of dough; and it was super dark. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

[*]And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. A whole lot of light.

[*]And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness and said, "play nice, you two."

[*]And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. And God had a well-deserved beer, which he invented earlier in the day and was excited to tell someone, but there was no one.

[*]And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God laughed about flooding the place later with all of this water.

[*]And God made the firmament from a firmament self-start kit, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so, but it took a few calls to customer service.

[*]And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And God said, "this is a lot of work."

[*]And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

[*]And God called the dry land Iraq; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good, for now.

[*]And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and tons of desert which made life hard for living things, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind where people would later see images of his kid in a fig, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so, because God got things done.

[*]And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was pretty good. And maybe redundant.

[*]And the evening and the morning were the third day. And God built a calendar to keep track of this since God underestimated the size and scope of this project. And God was grossly over budget.

[*]And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years. And let heaven be populated with women who look like Adriana Lima.

[*]And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made the metaphor, followed by the lock.

[*]And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: oh, and he made the stars also. But really God forgot that there should be entire other volumes about stars since they often have their own planets with their own life. And firmaments. And waters. And creepers. But God was kind of busy at the moment and couldn't be bothered with this.

[*]And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, except that they were really dim because they were super far away.

[*]And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good, which we already covered above.

[*]And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. God crossed Thursday off the calendar. Or was it Wednesday?

[*]And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And beetles. Mostly beetles.

[*]And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good, especially if you're into hunting and water parks.

[*]And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And God decided all of these good things should fight to the death for survival.

[*]And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. God was really cruising now.

[*]And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and vague creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. Bang. Done.

[*]And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. Except for badass things like honey badgers.

[*]And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Because man is awesome.

[*]So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God let females use sex as a weapon.

[*]And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Basically, just wreck the place. It's yours.

[*]And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And God expected man to eventually invent things like doughnuts to replace natural foods. And God would recoil in horror over man's inability to stay healthy.

[*]And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

[*]And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was basically awesome. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. And God invented football. And it was on all weekend.

[*]And then...

[*]No and then.

 
'timschochet said:
'Mr. Pickles said:
timschochet (aka Mr. Ham) retypes a majority of his material in his Civil War thread without proper attribution. When challenged, he says he mentioned this up front, but people have a difficult time finding any of his original thoughts in his posts. Similar transgressions appear in his threads about WWII and the History of Rock and Roll
In both the World War II and and Civil War threads, the sources I used can be found in the opening post. With very few exceptions, I transcribed directly out of books which I noted, and sometimes added my own commentary. I wrote of my intention to do it up front, and very rarely have I ever used internet sources. The only reason that I used internet sources on the rock and roll thread is because my source book hadn't arrived yet. Now that it has, I don't expect to use the internet again. If I do I will note it.But the narrative threads are meant to be fun, informative and platforms for discussion, nothing more. I have never tried to represent this stuff as my own, and I never will.
By not listing your sources at the end of each post, the bolded is pretty well what you are doing. By not sourcing each post you're leaving the perception to all the people who didn't read the first post that all of your writing is completely your own work.To be frank, I really don't see why you have such a problem with sourcing each of your posts; doing so doesn't even threaten any of your goals of creating a fun and informative platform for discussion.
It's because I hardly ever even do it. For instance, for the rest of the rock and roll thread, I'm going to be using ONE source. Am I supposed to start every post with "From the book, Rock of Ages"?? How absurd! And it's not even accurate, because as I already pointed out, I often add my own thoughts from time to time. I'm amazed that anyone thinks this is a big deal anyhow. The purpose of those narrative threads is not to show how smart I am, it's to discuss topics which interest me and which I hope interest others. Most of the people ripping me here are the same ones who seem to always want to criticize me for starting those threads. Now they're criticizing me for the material I choose to put in those threads. If they find the threads as dull as they claim, why are they bothering to read them?
First of all, adding your own thoughts to the posts doesn't give you the right to not have to cite sources you use; I didn't think that would be need to be explained to you. Secondly, the number of sources you use is irrelevant, the issue is that people aren't going to know you are sourcing material unless they read one certain post in a thread that'll have hundreds of posts. As for the bolded, I don't see how that is absurd at all. Although you don't have to go about it as if you're writing scripture. Just ending each post with a footnote: "Source: Rock of Ages" would do the job. If it's not a big deal like you claim, why are you so against doing it? You're writing out hundreds of words with each post, I don't see how adding 5-10 words at the end of each one is such a chore.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
(quote name='source')(/quote)Where parentheses are brackets.

[QUOTE='-fish-]bravo, Pickles.
[/QUOTE]Insert timopinion herePretty easy, no?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top