DCP's ongoing problem with plagiarism

[Marcus]

That was quick. The first paragraph below was just inserted at the beginning of Peterson's plagiarized blog entry:



I put up my post 50 minutes ago. If my calculation of the time differences is correct, DCP wrote that excuse/paragraph and added it to his blog entry about 25 minutes after I posted.

Once again, I find it utterly astonishing he just doesn't do this up front.

EXACTLY.

Is it a travesty and a shame to actually list your sources or something?! I seriously do not get why Peterson insists on plagiarizing all the time with every thing involved, whether entire paragraphs, order of subjects, etc. Is he allergic to footnotes and listing sources or something? Have the brethren threatened his membership if he so much as intimates anything like scholarship anymore? It is fascinating to see his clumsiness in all these regards. Goddamn Dan, seriously?! You didn't do this as editor of the FARMS Review, why now?!? It's patently idiotic of you. And its SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO easy to see you continuing to do it over and over. Don't you honestly get it???

I really do wonder that as well.

[Marcus]

I am relatively new here. Is he aware of these connections? If so how does he reconcile this with scholarship? Is he operating on a different paradigm when blogging? Does he think it fools people? I don't get the motivation.

If you read back through this thread, his various responses to being repeatedly caught plagiarizing are documented. He's gone through complete denial, arguing that it really isn't what it is, that it was an accident, etc., all the way to insisting that those who notice his plagiarizing are attacking him.

He's occasionally offered a mea culpa, but obviously doing so has not stopped his plagiarism.

[Doctor Steuss]

I do not claim entries on this blog as publications of mine

Heh.

[I Have Questions]

I do not claim entries on this blog as publications of mine

Heh.

I think that’s his way of trying to avoid being held to account for plagiarising others content. However, despite him saying he doesn’t claim his blogs content as a publication of his, that is exactly what it is. Once you post something on your blog, you have “published” it, it’s your publication.

Max Baker-Hytch is alive and well and teaching at Oxford, where he is on the faculty. He’d probably take a dim view to being plagiarised, and of plagiarising in general. This is his University’s policy on the subject…

The University defines plagiarism as follows:

“Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition, as is the use of material generated wholly or in part through use of artificial intelligence (save when use of A.I. for assessment has received prior authorisation e.g. as a reasonable adjustment for a student’s disability). Plagiarism can also include re-using your own work without citation. Under the regulations for examinations, intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.”

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/ ... plagiarism

By presenting Max Baker-Hytch’s ideas as if they were his own, Peterson has met the standard at Oxford for it to be classed as “plagiarism”.

[Marcus]

Heh.

I think that’s his way of trying to avoid being held to account for plagiarising others content. However, despite him saying he doesn’t claim his blogs content as a publication of his, that is exactly what it is. Once you post something on your blog, you have “published” it, it’s your publication.

Max Baker-Hytch is alive and well and teaching at Oxford, where he is on the faculty. He’d probably take a dim view to being plagiarised, and of plagiarising in general. This is his University’s policy on the subject…

The University defines plagiarism as follows:

“Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition, as is the use of material generated wholly or in part through use of artificial intelligence (save when use of A.I. for assessment has received prior authorisation e.g. as a reasonable adjustment for a student’s disability). Plagiarism can also include re-using your own work without citation. Under the regulations for examinations, intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.”

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/ ... plagiarism

By presenting Max Baker-Hytch’s ideas as if they were his own, Peterson has met the standard at Oxford for it to be classed as “plagiarism”.

Yes, he has. A freshman may need some leeway to learn this lesson, a retired professor from a university whose plagiarism has been fully documented for at least the last 6-7 years should not.

He should also remember that the patheos site which hosts his blog has this in their terms of agreement:

... By posting, submitting or otherwise exchanging Member Content on or through the Site, you acknowledge, agree and understand that...(iii) you explicitly represent and warrant that you are the sole owner of such Member Content or have all rights and licenses necessary regarding such Member Content

https://www.patheos.com/terms-of-use?p=2

he can argue all he wants that he doesn't consider his blog entries to be 'publishing', but patheos considers what he is doing to be a violation of the terms of their agreement.

[Philo Sofee]

I think that’s his way of trying to avoid being held to account for plagiarising others content. However, despite him saying he doesn’t claim his blogs content as a publication of his, that is exactly what it is. Once you post something on your blog, you have “published” it, it’s your publication.

Max Baker-Hytch is alive and well and teaching at Oxford, where he is on the faculty. He’d probably take a dim view to being plagiarised, and of plagiarising in general. This is his University’s policy on the subject…

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/ ... plagiarism

By presenting Max Baker-Hytch’s ideas as if they were his own, Peterson has met the standard at Oxford for it to be classed as “plagiarism”.

Yes, he has. A freshman may need some leeway to learn this lesson, a retired professor from a university whose plagiarism has been fully documented for at least the last 6-7 years should not.

He should also remember that the patheos site which hosts his blog has this in their terms of agreement:

... By posting, submitting or otherwise exchanging Member Content on or through the Site, you acknowledge, agree and understand that...(iii) you explicitly represent and warrant that you are the sole owner of such Member Content or have all rights and licenses necessary regarding such Member Content

https://www.patheos.com/terms-of-use?p=2

he can argue all he wants that he doesn't consider his blog entries to be 'publishing', but patheos considers what he is doing to be a violation of the terms of their agreement.

It is remarkable that Patheos has allowed him so much leeway for so long. Are they even aware of him doing this so egregiously? Why haven't they acted on this?

[Res Ipsa]

I think that’s his way of trying to avoid being held to account for plagiarising others content. However, despite him saying he doesn’t claim his blogs content as a publication of his, that is exactly what it is. Once you post something on your blog, you have “published” it, it’s your publication.

Max Baker-Hytch is alive and well and teaching at Oxford, where he is on the faculty. He’d probably take a dim view to being plagiarised, and of plagiarising in general. This is his University’s policy on the subject…

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/ ... plagiarism

By presenting Max Baker-Hytch’s ideas as if they were his own, Peterson has met the standard at Oxford for it to be classed as “plagiarism”.

Yes, he has. A freshman may need some leeway to learn this lesson, a retired professor from a university whose plagiarism has been fully documented for at least the last 6-7 years should not.

He should also remember that the patheos site which hosts his blog has this in their terms of agreement:

... By posting, submitting or otherwise exchanging Member Content on or through the Site, you acknowledge, agree and understand that...(iii) you explicitly represent and warrant that you are the sole owner of such Member Content or have all rights and licenses necessary regarding such Member Content

https://www.patheos.com/terms-of-use?p=2

he can argue all he wants that he doesn't consider his blog entries to be 'publishing', but patheos considers what he is doing to be a violation of the terms of their agreement.

I think that's a good point, Marcus. The original is posted on a Christian website of an organization located in Scotland. Some websites address copyright and licensing. If I post on Patheos, I still retain copyright, but I also agree to a very broad license for others to use the content. The website where the original was found doesn't say anything about copyright, so the original author still owns it.

Although attribution addresses plagiarism, it doesn't address copyright. Given that the blog post is basically a recitation of the original content, including wholesale incorporation of sentences, I'd be surprised if it fell under Scotland's "fair deal" exceptions, which are similar to the U.S. "fair use."

[malkie]

I think that’s his way of trying to avoid being held to account for plagiarising others content. However, despite him saying he doesn’t claim his blogs content as a publication of his, that is exactly what it is. Once you post something on your blog, you have “published” it, it’s your publication.

Max Baker-Hytch is alive and well and teaching at Oxford, where he is on the faculty. He’d probably take a dim view to being plagiarised, and of plagiarising in general. This is his University’s policy on the subject…

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/ ... plagiarism

By presenting Max Baker-Hytch’s ideas as if they were his own, Peterson has met the standard at Oxford for it to be classed as “plagiarism”.

Yes, he has. A freshman may need some leeway to learn this lesson, a retired professor from a university whose plagiarism has been fully documented for at least the last 6-7 years should not.

He should also remember that the patheos site which hosts his blog has this in their terms of agreement:

... By posting, submitting or otherwise exchanging Member Content on or through the Site, you acknowledge, agree and understand that...(iii) you explicitly represent and warrant that you are the sole owner of such Member Content or have all rights and licenses necessary regarding such Member Content

https://www.patheos.com/terms-of-use?p=2

he can argue all he wants that he doesn't consider his blog entries to be 'publishing', but patheos considers what he is doing to be a violation of the terms of their agreement.

[my highlighting]
A few years ago I tutored students in a high school-level English class. We used Purdue Online Writing Lab - Quoting, Paraphrasing, and Summarizing, among other sources, for the section on how to handle research material.

We talked about how to ensure that use of your research notes does not turn into inadvertant plagiarism, and covered the concept that even inadvertant plagiarism is an academic offence - it's the writer's responsibility to ensure it doesn't happen.

It's so easy, these days, to run your work through a plagiarism checker, that (in my opinion) there's no real defence.

[Tator]

Q: Why does Ditto Copy Pasterson do it?
A: Because he is lazy and has been lazy his whole existence.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Yes, he has. A freshman may need some leeway to learn this lesson, a retired professor from a university whose plagiarism has been fully documented for at least the last 6-7 years should not.

He should also remember that the patheos site which hosts his blog has this in their terms of agreement:

he can argue all he wants that he doesn't consider his blog entries to be 'publishing', but patheos considers what he is doing to be a violation of the terms of their agreement.

It is remarkable that Patheos has allowed him so much leeway for so long. Are they even aware of him doing this so egregiously? Why haven't they acted on this?

Yes. I have contacted them multiple times with the many examples Tom and Marcus put together, and offered to provide more if needed.

They don’t give two flying "F"s.

- Doc