K. Shirts Caught Plagiarizing on Sciforums

[_bcspace]

Never claimed anything but personal experience on that issue (Harmony's) which is pretty much all you guys are giving at the moment. Where is the simple research required to prove KS plagarized which is the claim Scratch has made by spreading it?

No, silly goose, I am referring to the claim that "outrageous claims . . . drives people into our Church . . . "

Your evidence for this is what? You limited anecdotal experience as a stake missionary in a one stake.

So, with your N=(what 6?), you are prepared to generalize (and that is exactly what the context of your posts does)???

Wow, super duper research there ol' buddy.

Yes. My anecdote Trump's the claim KS plagarized any day. Mine may or may not be true from your perspective, but from that same perspective, the KS claim is false, goose or no goose.

[_guy sajer]

Never claimed anything but personal experience on that issue (Harmony's) which is pretty much all you guys are giving at the moment. Where is the simple research required to prove KS plagarized which is the claim Scratch has made by spreading it?

No, silly goose, I am referring to the claim that "outrageous claims . . . drives people into our Church . . . "

Your evidence for this is what? You limited anecdotal experience as a stake missionary in a one stake.

So, with your N=(what 6?), you are prepared to generalize (and that is exactly what the context of your posts does)???

Wow, super duper research there ol' buddy.

Yes. My anecdote Trump's the claim KS plagarized any day. Mine may or may not be true from your perspective, but from that same perspective, the KS claim is false, goose or no goose.

Your anecdote Trump's absolutely nothing. It's totally irrelevant, moreover, to any issue related to plagiarism or accusations of plagiarism.

Anecdotes as evidence Trump nothing, aside from absolutist arguments (e.g., an anecdote is sufficient to disprove a claim that something is ALWAYS this or that), but beyond that, in a purely evidentiary sense, your little anecdote is meaningless, except to understand what's happening in your stake, but even then, I'm guessing that you're extrapolating from a limited and biased sample set.

You do no better or careful research than anyone else here. Why not just admit it and stop pretending your some kind of uber researcher.

[_bcspace]

Yes. My anecdote Trump's the claim KS plagarized any day. Mine may or may not be true from your perspective, but from that same perspective, the KS claim is false, goose or no goose.

Your anecdote Trump's absolutely nothing.

It Trump's anything that is absolutely false such as the KS plagarism claim.

It's totally irrelevant, moreover, to any issue related to plagiarism or accusations of plagiarism.

It's quite relevant in the sense of the other thread and it's relevant here because it has everything to do with pointing out how the plagarism claim was either poorly researched or not researched at all.

Anecdotes as evidence Trump nothing, aside from absolutist arguments (e.g., an anecdote is sufficient to disprove a claim that something is ALWAYS this or that), but beyond that, in a purely evidentiary sense, your little anecdote is meaningless, except to understand what's happening in your stake, but even then, I'm guessing that you're extrapolating from a limited and biased sample set.

You do no better or careful research than anyone else here. Why not just admit it and stop pretending your some kind of uber researcher.

Quite a smoke screen you have there for the real issue. Tell us, did KS plagarize in the case presented by the OP or not?

[_guy sajer]

Yes. My anecdote Trump's the claim KS plagarized any day. Mine may or may not be true from your perspective, but from that same perspective, the KS claim is false, goose or no goose.

Your anecdote Trump's absolutely nothing.

It Trump's anything that is absolutely false such as the KS plagarism claim.

It's totally irrelevant, moreover, to any issue related to plagiarism or accusations of plagiarism.

It's quite relevant in the sense of the other thread and it's relevant here because it has everything to do with pointing out how the plagarism claim was either poorly researched or not researched at all.

Anecdotes as evidence Trump nothing, aside from absolutist arguments (e.g., an anecdote is sufficient to disprove a claim that something is ALWAYS this or that), but beyond that, in a purely evidentiary sense, your little anecdote is meaningless, except to understand what's happening in your stake, but even then, I'm guessing that you're extrapolating from a limited and biased sample set.

You do no better or careful research than anyone else here. Why not just admit it and stop pretending your some kind of uber researcher.

Quite a smoke screen you have there for the real issue. Tell us, did KS plagarize in the case presented by the OP or not?

What friggn' smoke screen? I wasn't even addressing this issue. It may be your real issue, but it wasn't mine.

I have no incentive to care whether it was or was not plagiarism. I don't worry about discussion BB's, and I don't care if people plagiarize on them. That said, based on all the evidence, I'd say, no, it was not.

There's a difference between doing research and drawing inferences. We all draw inferences based on what we see and hear and read. Scratch was drawing an inference, he wasn't conducting research. He read something, drew and inference from it, and shared it with us. He may have missed some critical information, but this doesn't imply sloppy "research," it just means he didn't read carefully. There's a difference, and I'd think someone with your self proclaimed investigative powers would be able to see it.

[_Sethbag]

For what it's worth, I think Kerry just made a mistake in terms of putting quotes around the entire section he meant to be quoting from Christianson. It's pretty clear that he said that what he was putting in next was from Christianson, and I don't really get into the technicality debates over whether his attribution to Christianson should have still applied once he inserted some paragraph breaks. I mean, come on.

Like Guy said, internet message boards are more like conversations, not doctoral dissertations. I think Shirts deserves the benefit of the doubt in this case. I still think almost everything I ever read or heard from the guy was friggin retarded, but still, gotta be fair to him. I don't think he plagiarized anything here.

[_bcspace]

What friggn' smoke screen? I wasn't even addressing this issue. It may be your real issue, but it wasn't mine.

Then why did you bring it up?

I have no incentive to care whether it was or was not plagiarism. I don't worry about discussion BB's, and I don't care if people plagiarize on them.

Then why are you posting in this thread?

That said, based on all the evidence, I'd say, no, it was not.

Thank you! So then did Scratch make an outrageous claim? Or was his research so lazy that he failed to see it? Or (as I have posited) Scratch didn't do any research at all preferring to generate a headline?

There's a difference between doing research and drawing inferences. We all draw inferences based on what we see and hear and read. Scratch was drawing an inference, he wasn't conducting research. He read something, drew and inference from it, and shared it with us. He may have missed some critical information, but this doesn't imply sloppy "research," it just means he didn't read carefully. There's a difference, and I'd think someone with your self proclaimed investigative powers would be able to see it.

I do see it. Scratch is not immune from ad hominem and that is probably the most positive and forgiving assesment possible here.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I don't think he plagiarized anything here.

Agreed.

[_guy sajer]

What friggn' smoke screen? I wasn't even addressing this issue. It may be your real issue, but it wasn't mine.

Then why did you bring it up?

[quote]

I didn't. Go back to my original post on this thread a re-read it. It shows that my purpose was not to comment on Scratch's allegation but to point out once again your hypocrisy in accusing others of lazy research (with specific reference to your comment about Harmony) when you also engage in what, by well-known criteria, is also lazy research.

As for Scratch, I think he/she has a tendency to make mountains out of molehills, and this was another example of it. Though he/she does come up with some good stuff now and then.

[_Mister Scratch]

I think a better title to this thread would have been "Mopologist fails to put a quote in a quote box, though he cited the actual reference."

Oh? Where is the reference to actual page numbers? This seems rather important, given that he's (apparently) using a chunk of verbatim text. He did not "clearly" cite the "actual reference anywhere. His post fails to identify which text is Kerry's and which is Christenson's---a fact which was confusing to one of the other posters on the thread. (It was so confusing that the posters were unsure whether or not Kerry and Christenson were the same person.) Furthermore, Kerry Shirts is an adult, presumably with a post-secondary education. If he made a mistake such as this in a Freshman composition course, he would have a lot of explaining to do. At minimum, he would get a very stern warning from his instructor.

Anyways, I'm sort of confused as to why the TBMs have keyed in on this clear violation of quotation practices. in my opinion, the more interesting portion of the thread involved the "reaming" of KS's basic argument.

[_antishock8]

The dude got caught plagiarizing, and backpeddled with some lame excuse. I'm pretty sure most of us here are familiar with the rules of plagiarizing. He clearly plagiarized.

From wiki: "Some individuals caught plagiarizing in academic or journalistic contexts claim that they plagiarized unintentionally, by failing to include quotations or give the appropriate citation."