DCP's ongoing problem with plagiarism

[Philo Sofee]

I wonder if he would’ve accepted his own excuses had they came from his students? #doubt #byuprofessor #priesthoodholder #templerecommendquestionabouthonesty

How many years has he been doing this, excusing his behavior, and blaming others for his dishonesty? It appears he can't *finger snap* get a handle on this plagiarism thing.

- Doc

In his mind it is no more wrong than in Donald Trump's mind it is wrong to grab women by their pussies.

[Xenophon]

Man am I glad we were able to preserve the old board.

On this thread you can find my shifting thoughts on this over the years. Back on page 7 you can find me attempting to grant some benefit of the doubt. After 4 years of the same mistake over and over I don't know how I'm expected to accept the "mea culpas" anymore.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Good Lord, the user Seatimer said:

Still, what I'm trying to say is that someone went to a great and extensive bit of trouble in order to implicate those 123 out of 4000 words into something they can claim as "plagiarized."

Literally took a few seconds to recognize what was written wasn’t ’Dan’s voice’, copy it, paste it into Google, and check it against the source material. Is Seatimer suggesting that he finds using one’s brain and using Google is some sort of onerous exercise only academics can tolerate? I’m a midwit, at best, and spotting a plagiarism is easy.

But then again, we've seen it before, thus our good host is forced to take extreme cautions in whoever and whatever he quotes to leave appropriate acknowledgements lest he be accused of plagiaristic behavior.

But he doesn't do that. That’s the problem. It’s theft. It’s dishonesty. And it’s deception when DCP crafts an article that makes the stolen content appear to be his own thoughts in an attempt to appear smarter than he really is. Good Lord, Mormons have really shown themselves to be, at their base, comfortable with lying. That’s crazy. The readers on his blog should be taking him to task, not aiding and abetting his wounded ego.

- Doc

[Dr Exiled]

Yes, DCP obviously plagiarizes to try and make himself look a little smarter than he really is. It isn't that hard to say that this next thought came from such and such a source. I like it because .... or it doesn't fit because .... or whatever ....

He's already cutting and pasting. So why not paste the source as well? Just follow the Purdue site on plagiarism already, DCP! https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/avoiding_pla ... index.html

However, with his busy schedule, traveling here and there, having important meetings with the Midge on their next apostate target ... who has the time?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Yes, DCP obviously plagiarizes to try and make himself look a little smarter than he really is. It isn't that hard to say that this next thought came from such and such a source. I like it because .... or it doesn't fit because .... or whatever ....

He's already cutting and pasting. So why not paste the source as well? Just follow the Purdue site on plagiarism already, DCP! https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/avoiding_pla ... index.html

However, with his busy schedule, traveling here and there, having important meetings with the Midge on their next apostate target ... who has the time?

DON’T FORGET THE MANUSCRIPTS. SO. MANY. MANUSCRIPTS.

-_-

[Doctor Steuss]

I don’t understand the relevance of pointing out the word count. Is there a specific word count threshold where it would be problematic, vs. not? What's the percentage point when passing someone’s thoughts and words as your own, in a published piece, in a journal, no longer gets to be a jumping board to illustrate your own victimhood?


There is a group of people whose only reason for existence is to show how horrible I am <<<insert self-deprecating humor>>>>. Now, they are making a stink about me because I put 123 milliliters of urine <<<insert passive-aggressive pseudo-jab>>> in the 4000 milliliters of juice! I did put the urine in the juice, but it was only because <<<insert same excuse>>>, which naturally goes to demonstrate <<<insert self-deprecating humor>>>.

[Dr Moore]

Uh, is the defense being offered that it was “only” 123 words out of 4,000?

1. It’s 123 that we know…
2. Is 3% being proposed as an allowable amount of plagiarism?

[Dr Exiled]

I like this response from a poster named Jack over at sic et non:

Either that or people with a strong eidetic memory--as brilliant as they are--may not always remember precisely where certain ideas come from--especially when they're in the habit of processing large amounts of information.

Having said that, it makes me wonder if the criticism that Bro. Peterson has received on this particular point might have more to do with sour grapes than anything else.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... qus_thread

I'd never heard of "eidetic memory" before so I had to look it up. It is a synonym for photographic memory (but sounds cooler). Anyway, so DCP's memory is so advanced that he remembers the quotes verbatim but somehow doesn't remember the sites where he lifted the quotes from? I like it.

Also, Jack, I don't think it is sour grapes why people call DCP out for his habitual plagiarism. These are rules we all have to follow and he should too. Professors lose their jobs over this. Lawyers get sanctioned over this. Researchers get canned as well. And it isn't that hard to run a check via various websites to see if there is plagiarism or not. Here is one: https://papersowl.com/free-plagiarism-checker

[Xenophon]

There is a group of people whose only reason for existence is to show how horrible I am <<<insert self-deprecating humor>>>>. Now, they are making a stink about me because I put 123 milliliters of urine <<<insert passive-aggressive pseudo-jab>>> in the 4000 milliliters of juice! I did put the urine in the juice, but it was only because <<<insert same excuse>>>, which naturally goes to demonstrate <<<insert self-deprecating humor>>>.

[malkie]

To generalize a little more:

There is a group of people whose only reason for existence is to show how horrible I am <<<insert self-deprecating humor>>>. Now, they are making a stink about me because I put <<<insert something nasty>>> <<<insert passive-aggressive pseudo-jab>>> in the <<<insert something nice>>>! I did put the <<<nasty>>> in the <<<nice>>>, but it was only because <<<insert some excuse>>>, which naturally goes to demonstrate <<<insert self-deprecating humor>>>.

A suitably-populated database and a little bit of scripting "glue", and some columns will write themselves.

Sudden thought: perhaps the d/b and script are already being used?