THANK GOD

[captainfearnot]

I like the page on academic honesty in the BYU Honor Code, because it lists several examples of different kinds of plagiarism.

Cecil O. Samuelson discussed plagiarism in his 2004 address to the student body at BYU:

The definition is straightforward, but the practicalities seem to trip many people—including some of you. Basically, to plagiarize is to take or pass off someone else’s words, ideas, or work as your own. As with most infractions, there are both blatant and subtle examples of plagiarism. To lift pages or paragraphs from published works or from the efforts of a classmate or anyone else without permission or citation constitutes plagiarism. Of course it is appropriate and often helpful to quote the works of others, but it is always necessary to give clear and adequate attribution to your sources. Some believe that using materials from the Internet or obscure resources loosens the rules. It does not! Some consider it appropriate to change a few words or the sequence of a few sentences or paragraphs and then claim the product as original work. Again, think of the basic definition.

I suppose intent goes into it. If you're shopping and you stick something in your pocket and you honestly intended to pay for it along with everything else in your shopping cart, but forgot, and walked out of the store with it, is that dishonest? I suppose not, if it was an honest mistake. Accidental stealing is still stealing, though. And you would have a tough time convincing anyone that you did not intend to steal the item when you stuck it in your pocket. We don't usually stuff items we intend to pay for in our pockets when we shop.

When you copy and paste sentences written by other people, and put them in a post right alongside your own writing, with no indication that one sentence is your work and the next is not, the reader is deceived into thinking it is all your work. Maybe it was sincerely not your intent to deceive, but the deception still happened. And you would have a tough time convincing people it was not intentional if you made no effort to disclose the quoted material.

Obviously we are not in college here. None of us is getting academic credit for anything we write. This is just an internet message board and the stakes couldn't be lower. To me, plagiarizing in an environment like this is like cheating in a board game you're playing with friends. The other players might be offended or they might not care at all, depending on how seriously they take their board gaming.

[Tony]

I did stop.

I explained where you plagiarized, you apologized (in your own way) and changed your OP and then I apologized for being mean about it. Done and done.

Then Tony brought it up again, coming to your defense. That's fine, no harm done—he's just trying to make you feel better as you say, so I didn't respond. I was happy to let the subject drop.

But then he brought it up again. Clearly he has some interesting ideas concerning modern prophets and their support for plagiarism that he'd like to discuss. I'm obliging him.

Captain,

This woman was taken in plagiarism, in the very act. Now, the Supreme Court, in the law, commanded us that such should be held accountable on a privately owned internet forum: but what sayest thou?

Why not just give God the glory for a wonderful message and not get worked up about the original source and the legalese of "plagiarism"? You come off sounding like a Pharisee, so, if you are without sin, then go ahead and cast the first stone.

[Tony]

Jeremy, do you believe the Doctrine and Covenants is the word of God revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith?

I have received a witness (through the Holy Ghost - thank God) that the words of God do indeed exist in today's D&C (which is actually the covenants part - the doctrine portion was removed) as well as the 1835 version which contained the doctrine.

As an aside - Did you know that an estimated 28% of the 1835 edition of the D&C was removed?

David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses, apostatized and was excommunicated in 1838. He started his own church years later based on the Book of Mormon and Bible alone being the word of God. He claims to have a witness of the Holy Ghost that the Doctrine and Covenants is not the word of God.

David Whitmer wrote, "We have the promise that the Holy Ghost will guide us into all truth. Be sure you have the Holy Ghost. If you have any doubt about having it, seek God in fasting and prayer until you know you have the Spirit of God.

"We were shown that the Book of Doctrine and Covenants contained many doctrines of error, and that it must be laid aside; also that when God's own due time came for building up the waste places of Zion, that the Church of Christ must be established upon the teachings of Christ in the two sacred books. Now I hope you understand me on this point. There is no disagreement between my testimony and the testimony of these brethren. They were led out of their errors, and are upon the record to this effect, rejecting the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. John Whitmer was clerk of the Church of Christ, built upon the Book of Mormon and Bible alone."

The case of David Whitmer proves that people will listen to the whisperings of Satan and think they are receiving revelation from God through the Holy Ghost. They believe that the Holy Ghost is telling them something contrary to what the prophet and the Church are telling them, which means they will go against the prophet and the Church. The problem is that they are actually listening to Satan.

[Bee Prepared]

I did stop.

I explained where you plagiarized, you apologized (in your own way) and changed your OP and then I apologized for being mean about it. Done and done.

Then Tony brought it up again, coming to your defense. That's fine, no harm done—he's just trying to make you feel better as you say, so I didn't respond. I was happy to let the subject drop.

But then he brought it up again. Clearly he has some interesting ideas concerning modern prophets and their support for plagiarism that he'd like to discuss. I'm obliging him.

Captain,

This woman was taken in plagiarism, in the very act. Now, the Supreme Court, in the law, commanded us that such should be held accountable on a privately owned internet forum: but what sayest thou?

Why not just give God the glory for a wonderful message and not get worked up about the original source and the legalese of "plagiarism"? You come off sounding like a Pharisee, so, if you are without sin, then go ahead and cast the first stone.

Tony is a Christlike example, I value his words in all things. I believe "captainfearnot" has a point, and I also believe if the truth were known he was put up to this. Where did he come from? There has been many cases of plaguerism, if you want to call it that, innocently on this forum. Why did he research what I wrote? To discredit me, because I believe in Prophets and this church. That's his real intention. I suggest we put him on ignore, this is not productive. A real teacher and leader tolerates his own faults as well as others.( I believe someone else said that, and I don't care) I've made much worse mistakes than this in my life, as I'm sure he has. I'm moving on and enjoying the forum. He can critique me all he wants, I have received many pm's concerning how he approached this subject, asking me to ignore him, I'm taking that advice. Perhaps whoever put you up to this has someone else for you to pick on? Whats it like to be a pawn? I will continue to post things the way I like, have me arrested! :))

We are not perfect but God is. ( oh dang, I didn't pay attention to who said that) We believe in God the Eternal Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost. ( Wait, is that one of the articles of faith? Oh well) God of our Fathers, whose Almighty hand. ( Is that a hymn, I can't remember if I wrote it or not?) Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart. ( I suppose I should look up that scripture but I'm too lazy, I'm sure all of you will believe I wrote it.)

[freedomforall]

Bee, what are your sources?

For example, it looks like you lifted your fourth paragraph from Hans at mormon.org. They are word-for-word identical, including the typo ("This all works is [sic] harmony." (Or perhaps you and Hans both lifted it from the same place?)

Your second paragraph appears to be original. Other paragraphs look like they were taken from other mormon.org contributors, or other sites.

For example, the somewhat odd sounding statement "Jesus Christ would not have spent time establishing prophets and apostles if that was not how he wanted his church to be led" was posted verbatim by Matt Shelley of Gilbert, AZ in a comment after an article about prophets on a Christian site. I'm still left to wonder if Matt is the original author of this statement or if you both borrowed it from the same source.

I have learned so much by being on this forum. I research the topic, reading as much as I can. I have always had a difficult time articulating
my words, so some of them are mine and some are comments I agree with. The commenters don't have full names or real names most of the time,
so giving credit is impossible, and some do submit their names. Is this wrong?

If so, and some of you hate copy and paste, don't read my posts. In doing research on different topics, I have seen many times where something
has been copy and pasted on this forum, It has never crossed my mind that they are doing something wrong, I just felt like they agreed with it, and then my thoughts go to what I feel about the subject. Sorry if this is offensive to you, seems like you put a lot of time in making your point.

Bee, just say what's in your heart and let the spirit help. We do not have to be eloquent in our speech when it comes to bearing testimony. The Spirit will help others that want to listen to receive in spirit that which is spoken in spirit. Remember, where two or more people are speaking there Christ is also. Well, here it is in proper context because I like to cut and paste as well:

Doctrine and Covenants 6:32
32 Verily, verily, I say unto you, as I said unto my disciples, where two or three are gathered together in my name, as touching one thing, behold, there will I be in the midst of them—even so am I in the midst of you.

Don't let people rattle you because some of the complainers about cutting and pasting probably cut and paste, or use other people's words when giving talks in church. This practice is done all the time. It may be a good practice to provide sources where possible.

[Bee Prepared]

Thank-you FFA, I value your words also, what an example you are to me! I have learned so much from you.

I love this quote, but I didn't pay attention to who wrote it! ( Hahaha, it was Mark Twain)

"Oh, dear me, how unspeakably funny and owlishly idiotic and grotesque was that ‘plagiarism’ farce! As if there was much of anything in any human utterance, oral or written, except plagiarism! The kernel, the soul — let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances — is plagiarism. For substantially all ideas are second-hand, consciously and unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources, and daily used by the garnerer with a pride and satisfaction born of the superstition that he originated them; whereas there is not a rag of originality about them anywhere except the little discoloration they get from his mental and moral calibre and his temperament, and which is revealed in characteristics of phrasing. When a great orator makes a great speech you are listening to ten centuries and ten thousand men — but we call it his speech, and really some exceedingly small portion of it is his. But not enough to signify. It is merely a Waterloo. It is Wellington’s battle, in some degree, and we call it his; but there are others that contributed. It takes a thousand men to invent a telegraph, or a steam engine, or a phonograph, or a telephone or any other important thing — and the last man gets the credit and we forget the others. He added his little mite — that is all he did. These object lessons should teach us that ninety-nine parts of all things that proceed from the intellect are plagiarisms, pure and simple; and the lesson ought to make us modest. But nothing can do that." ( like the quotation marks?)

[freedomforall]

Thank-you Tony, that's what I was trying to say. I thank God for a Prophet!

And isn't it ironic that, in a thread titled "Thank God," people are trying to determine who should be given credit for something you wrote when God is the only one who should be given the glory?

Tony, do you honestly think that your living prophets condone plagiarism?

Did you know that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon into English so we could read the written words of men from long ago? Did you know that he gets the credit for doing so? He wrote word for word what we have today. Is that plagiarism?
Then he went through Matthew and added or changed words to the text, of which, by the way, was already in English. Was that a form of plagiarism? I mean, he got the credit for that, too, did he not?

[captainfearnot]

I did stop.

I explained where you plagiarized, you apologized (in your own way) and changed your OP and then I apologized for being mean about it. Done and done.

Then Tony brought it up again, coming to your defense. That's fine, no harm done—he's just trying to make you feel better as you say, so I didn't respond. I was happy to let the subject drop.

But then he brought it up again. Clearly he has some interesting ideas concerning modern prophets and their support for plagiarism that he'd like to discuss. I'm obliging him.

Captain,

This woman was taken in plagiarism, in the very act. Now, the Supreme Court, in the law, commanded us that such should be held accountable on a privately owned internet forum: but what sayest thou?

Why not just give God the glory for a wonderful message and not get worked up about the original source and the legalese of "plagiarism"? You come off sounding like a Pharisee, so, if you are without sin, then go ahead and cast the first stone.

Yes, it's a privately owned message board. But words are all it is. Words are the coin of the realm. Or the money in the Monopoly bank, as it were.

Going back to my board game analogy, even if I'm new to game night, and you guys have been playing every night for years, if I notice someone cheating or breaking the rules of the game, I'm going to call them out on it. My initial assumption is that everyone wants to play by the rules.

Now, there are lots of ways I could be wrong. Maybe the community standard is that sneaking money out of the bank is perfectly okay, because everyone thinks it's more fun that way. I wouldn't happen to agree, but then it would be on me to go find another game night to play in if I don't like the way this one is run.

Maybe certain people honestly don't know why sneaking extra money from the bank is dishonest. Or else they are just careless when counting out those $100s and always give themselves too many. Well, we can help these people see the error of their ways and make the game more enjoyable for everyone.

Maybe we all know that cheating is wrong but we really want to win and we are weak and can't help it. Brother, I am right there with you. We are all sinners, of course. Just admit it, repent, and try and do better next time.

But if you're going to argue that cheating at board games is not dishonest, and rationalize your actions by saying that the money is fake anyway so it doesn't count, or God owns all the money to begin with, and pretend that the scriptures and the prophets back you up when it is so easy to find direct quotes from prophets saying "cheating at board games is dishonest and you should not do it," then you are going to get an argument from me. Because you are so plainly and demonstrably wrong.

(Incidentally, I wondered if this was a board where everyone plagiarizes and everyone is cool with it, so I went back and searched through old posts. Every time it is mentioned it is in a negative light. It also seems to be against the board rules. The community standard appears to be that plagiarism is not cool.)

[captainfearnot]

Thank-you FFA, I value your words also, what an example you are to me! I have learned so much from you.

I love this quote, but I didn't pay attention to who wrote it! ( Hahaha, it was Mark Twain)

"Oh, dear me, how unspeakably funny and owlishly idiotic and grotesque was that ‘plagiarism’ farce! As if there was much of anything in any human utterance, oral or written, except plagiarism! The kernel, the soul — let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances — is plagiarism. For substantially all ideas are second-hand, consciously and unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources, and daily used by the garnerer with a pride and satisfaction born of the superstition that he originated them; whereas there is not a rag of originality about them anywhere except the little discoloration they get from his mental and moral calibre and his temperament, and which is revealed in characteristics of phrasing. When a great orator makes a great speech you are listening to ten centuries and ten thousand men — but we call it his speech, and really some exceedingly small portion of it is his. But not enough to signify. It is merely a Waterloo. It is Wellington’s battle, in some degree, and we call it his; but there are others that contributed. It takes a thousand men to invent a telegraph, or a steam engine, or a phonograph, or a telephone or any other important thing — and the last man gets the credit and we forget the others. He added his little mite — that is all he did. These object lessons should teach us that ninety-nine parts of all things that proceed from the intellect are plagiarisms, pure and simple; and the lesson ought to make us modest. But nothing can do that." ( like the quotation marks?)

I have 17 posts on this board and 11 of them are in this thread, talking about plagiarism. That's not how I imagined I would start things off here at LDSFF. Honestly, if I could go back, knowing you a bit better Bee, I probably wouldn't have said anything.

But, in for a penny, in for a pound, as they say.

Twain isn't saying that any and all plagiarism is fine and dandy. If Helen Keller had copied verbatim from Margaret Canby's "Frost Fairies," she would have been found guilty of plagiarism, rather than acquitted, and it's doubtful that Twain would have defended such actions. But the charge was that she copied the ideas, not the words, and that's what Twain finds laughable—the idea that ideas can be plagiarized.

Stephen King gets accused of plagiarism on a similar basis quite frequently. Again, he has never lifted another author's words verbatim—that would be an open and shut case. But sometimes an author will recognize one of their own story ideas in one of King's stories, and that kind of situation is where Twain's quote, whether he is right or wrong, at least becomes relevant.

If we're really still on the fence about whether plagiarism is right or wrong, let's look at what they are teaching our kids in church. Here's a story from the New Era: "Stolen Words."

[deep water]

God speaks to His people through prophets, and still does.

Our Prophet, Thomas S. Monson, receives God's word in directing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is assisted by his counselors
and Quorum of the twelve.

" The Lordwill never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not
in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place."
( Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Wilford Woodruff.)

I believe this to be true, I support and sustain the Prophet. I thank God for him. When he speaks I hear truth. I am thankful we are not left without
the guidance of a Prophet in these latter days. We are warned and taught of deceptions, counseled to love our families, and many other things the Lord would have us know. The Book Of Mormon was written for our day, God has provided us a path in which to return to Him. I do not feel the right to complain or criticize, I only feel grateful for this guidance. My family and my life has been greatly blessed by being a member of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

So Bee, you want me to thank god that you do not believe in the scriptures? Or are you trying to get me to not believe in the scriptures?

[Bee Prepared]

God speaks to His people through prophets, and still does.

Our Prophet, Thomas S. Monson, receives God's word in directing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is assisted by his counselors
and Quorum of the twelve.

" The Lordwill never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not
in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place."
( Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Wilford Woodruff.)

I believe this to be true, I support and sustain the Prophet. I thank God for him. When he speaks I hear truth. I am thankful we are not left without
the guidance of a Prophet in these latter days. We are warned and taught of deceptions, counseled to love our families, and many other things the Lord would have us know. The Book Of Mormon was written for our day, God has provided us a path in which to return to Him. I do not feel the right to complain or criticize, I only feel grateful for this guidance. My family and my life has been greatly blessed by being a member of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

So Bee, you want me to thank god that you do not believe in the scriptures? Or are you trying to get me to not believe in the scriptures?

Since we have Mr. official "captainfearnot," with us now, I might mention that you should always capitialize God.

Anyway, good morning deep water! Can you explain to me what you mean?

[Bee Prepared]

Thank-you FFA, I value your words also, what an example you are to me! I have learned so much from you.

I love this quote, but I didn't pay attention to who wrote it! ( Hahaha, it was Mark Twain)

"Oh, dear me, how unspeakably funny and owlishly idiotic and grotesque was that ‘plagiarism’ farce! As if there was much of anything in any human utterance, oral or written, except plagiarism! The kernel, the soul — let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances — is plagiarism. For substantially all ideas are second-hand, consciously and unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources, and daily used by the garnerer with a pride and satisfaction born of the superstition that he originated them; whereas there is not a rag of originality about them anywhere except the little discoloration they get from his mental and moral calibre and his temperament, and which is revealed in characteristics of phrasing. When a great orator makes a great speech you are listening to ten centuries and ten thousand men — but we call it his speech, and really some exceedingly small portion of it is his. But not enough to signify. It is merely a Waterloo. It is Wellington’s battle, in some degree, and we call it his; but there are others that contributed. It takes a thousand men to invent a telegraph, or a steam engine, or a phonograph, or a telephone or any other important thing — and the last man gets the credit and we forget the others. He added his little mite — that is all he did. These object lessons should teach us that ninety-nine parts of all things that proceed from the intellect are plagiarisms, pure and simple; and the lesson ought to make us modest. But nothing can do that." ( like the quotation marks?)

I have 17 posts on this board and 11 of them are in this thread, talking about plagiarism. That's not how I imagined I would start things off here at LDSFF. Honestly, if I could go back, knowing you a bit better Bee, I probably wouldn't have said anything.

But, in for a penny, in for a pound, as they say.

Twain isn't saying that any and all plagiarism is fine and dandy. If Helen Keller had copied verbatim from Margaret Canby's "Frost Fairies," she would have been found guilty of plagiarism, rather than acquitted, and it's doubtful that Twain would have defended such actions. But the charge was that she copied the ideas, not the words, and that's what Twain finds laughable—the idea that ideas can be plagiarized.

Stephen King gets accused of plagiarism on a similar basis quite frequently. Again, he has never lifted another author's words verbatim—that would be an open and shut case. But sometimes an author will recognize one of their own story ideas in one of King's stories, and that kind of situation is where Twain's quote, whether he is right or wrong, at least becomes relevant.

If we're really still on the fence about whether plagiarism is right or wrong, let's look at what they are teaching our kids in church. Here's a story from the New Era: "Stolen Words."

" In for a penny, in for a pound," I know who you are now, you simply changed your user name and opened a new account. I also know that you are relentless, such as on the subject of vaccines. Using words like " Fine and dandy," is another dead giveaway.

Wow, all I can say is, get some help!

[captainfearnot]

Bee, I don't know who you think I am, but what you're describing would be a neat trick, since my account is older than yours.

All I've done is call you out on plagiarism in your OP. Maybe that was wrong of me. But at one point in the conversation you expressed gratitude to me for pointing it out, and apologized for your defensiveness.

At other points you've engaged in name-calling, personal attacks, and false accusations. You insinuate that I'm a grammar Nazi when I've never corrected anyone's spelling or punctuation. You accused me of being someone else's pawn, and now you say I'm someone else's sock puppet and in need of "help," as if I suffer from mental illness or something. All charges leveled with no evidence.

Bee, as far as I'm concerned, you and I are good. My argument is now with Tony, who has adopted what I believe to be an untenable position, that the words of the prophets and the scriptures can somehow be construed to justify plagiarism. Tony appears to be a big boy capable of defending his position, so I haven't pulled any punches with him.

But if you're interpreting my responses to Tony as attacks against you, then maybe it would be best to take the advice you have received in PMs and put me on ignore.

[Jeremy]

The case of David Whitmer proves that people will listen to the whisperings of Satan and think they are receiving revelation from God through the Holy Ghost.

I'm not sure how this applies to me being thankful that God speaks to his children through the Holy Ghost. Should I not be? Should I be more thankful that God speaks through prophets? How does one come to know that a particular individual is a prophet if not by the witness of the Holy Ghost?

I'm with Moroni on this one. It is by the Holy Ghost that we may know the truth of all things.

And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

Perhaps this principle changes once someone receives a witness that the church is true. Then the Holy Ghost becomes secondary... our third? Forth? At what point do we start to doubt the very source that convinced us of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon?

It seems to me that we should not doubt that same voice. What we should do is become acquainted and familiar with that voice so we know it's the same one.

[Bee Prepared]

Bee, I don't know who you think I am, but what you're describing would be a neat trick, since my account is older than yours.

All I've done is call you out on plagiarism in your OP. Maybe that was wrong of me. But at one point in the conversation you expressed gratitude to me for pointing it out, and apologized for your defensiveness.

At other points you've engaged in name-calling, personal attacks, and false accusations. You insinuate that I'm a grammar Nazi when I've never corrected anyone's spelling or punctuation. You accused me of being someone else's pawn, and now you say I'm someone else's sock puppet and in need of "help," as if I suffer from mental illness or something. All charges leveled with no evidence.

Bee, as far as I'm concerned, you and I are good. My argument is now with Tony, who has adopted what I believe to be an untenable position, that the words of the prophets and the scriptures can somehow be construed to justify plagiarism. Tony appears to be a big boy capable of defending his position, so I haven't pulled any punches with him.

But if you're interpreting my responses to Tony as attacks against you, then maybe it would be best to take the advice you have received in PMs and put me on ignore.

Oh, you don't like being charged? And now you want to continue this argument with Tony, who is obviously standing up for me, because he knows the intentions of my heart? Why make such a fuss about something that was not for money, or a grade, or was simply ignorance ,or was a violation of etiquette in giving acknowledgements. You are the one calling names, being insensitive. Plagiarism is a strong word, I was talking about thanking God! I have always used others thoughts on a subject, certainly not with the intention of being dishonest or cheating, or all the things you have accused me of, simply because they were stated better than I could have.

And no, you and I are not good. As far as putting you on ignore, I will make that decision and don't want or need your advice. Attacking Tony is attacking me, get a clue! And by the way, it appears Tony no longer wants to engage you, he made me feel better, that was his intention and what he said is correct.

[captainfearnot]

I don't like being falsely charged, no.

I only made one accusation against you. I accused you of copying and pasting the words of others and claiming them as your own. Which you did. I showed the evidence for my accusation, and you admitted that you did it, apologized, and fixed it.

I am also guilty of being insensitive toward you. When you explained why you didn't attribute your quotes and asked "Is this wrong?" I replied "Yes, of course it is, do your really not understand why?" My tone in that post was harsh, because I did not at the time believe that you really didn't understand why plagiarism is dishonest. Once I realized that was a possibility, I saw that my tone had been inappropriate and I apologized.

That's it. I never called you a derogatory name like captainpoopypants or made any other baseless accusations like you have against me. I tried to explain why I would call you out over something of so little real consequence with my board game analogy. I answered your questions about what constitutes plagiarism and why it is wrong by providing links to articles and with my own example about shoplifting. I can keep trying to explain it with more and more examples if you like.

Now there is all this round and round as you continue to offer excuses and rationalizations. You backed away from your apologies, apparently at the encouragement of Tony and others, and now you're trying to say that you either did not plagiarize, or that plagiarism isn't dishonest (I can't tell which, you seem to be switching back and forth between the two). Tony is not doing you any favors if he's managed to convince you that there's nothing wrong with plagiarism.

And just to show how honest and forthright you are, you've concocted stories about my motives, how I'm acting at someone else's behest, or am the alter-ego of some other board member. All of your accusations have been completely false and you have no basis for any of them. I guess I don't understand your strategy there.

If plagiarism is a strong word, that should give you some idea about how the offense it describes is generally regarded.

(And I suppose I'm not surprised that Tony is no longer interested in defending his completely untenable position.)

[freedomforall]

Someone is wrong.jpeg (21.2 KiB) Viewed 1619 times

[Bee Prepared]

Someone is wrong.jpeg

This one never gets old FFA! :ymhug: :))

[Bee Prepared]

I don't like being falsely charged, no.

I only made one accusation against you. I accused you of copying and pasting the words of others and claiming them as your own. Which you did. I showed the evidence for my accusation, and you admitted that you did it, apologized, and fixed it.

I am also guilty of being insensitive toward you. When you explained why you didn't attribute your quotes and asked "Is this wrong?" I replied "Yes, of course it is, do your really not understand why?" My tone in that post was harsh, because I did not at the time believe that you really didn't understand why plagiarism is dishonest. Once I realized that was a possibility, I saw that my tone had been inappropriate and I apologized.

That's it. I never called you a derogatory name like captainpoopypants or made any other baseless accusations like you have against me. I tried to explain why I would call you out over something of so little real consequence with my board game analogy. I answered your questions about what constitutes plagiarism and why it is wrong by providing links to articles and with my own example about shoplifting. I can keep trying to explain it with more and more examples if you like.

Now there is all this round and round as you continue to offer excuses and rationalizations. You backed away from your apologies, apparently at the encouragement of Tony and others, and now you're trying to say that you either did not plagiarize, or that plagiarism isn't dishonest (I can't tell which, you seem to be switching back and forth between the two). Tony is not doing you any favors if he's managed to convince you that there's nothing wrong with plagiarism.

And just to show how honest and forthright you are, you've concocted stories about my motives, how I'm acting at someone else's behest, or am the alter-ego of some other board member. All of your accusations have been completely false and you have no basis for any of them. I guess I don't understand your strategy there.

If plagiarism is a strong word, that should give you some idea about how the offense it describes is generally regarded.

(And I suppose I'm not surprised that Tony is no longer interested in defending his completely untenable position.)

Haha @ "captainpoopypants," I didn't think you caught that!

I have concocted nothing. ( stalker)

[freedomforall]

Someone is wrong.jpeg

This one never gets old FFA! :ymhug: :))

Brian actually introduced it months ago on a different thread only I think it was a much nicer one if I recall correctly. But, yes, it still works well.

[Tony]

I don't like being falsely charged, no.

I only made one accusation against you. I accused you of copying and pasting the words of others and claiming them as your own. Which you did. I showed the evidence for my accusation, and you admitted that you did it, apologized, and fixed it.

I am also guilty of being insensitive toward you. When you explained why you didn't attribute your quotes and asked "Is this wrong?" I replied "Yes, of course it is, do your really not understand why?" My tone in that post was harsh, because I did not at the time believe that you really didn't understand why plagiarism is dishonest. Once I realized that was a possibility, I saw that my tone had been inappropriate and I apologized.

That's it. I never called you a derogatory name like captainpoopypants or made any other baseless accusations like you have against me. I tried to explain why I would call you out over something of so little real consequence with my board game analogy. I answered your questions about what constitutes plagiarism and why it is wrong by providing links to articles and with my own example about shoplifting. I can keep trying to explain it with more and more examples if you like.

Now there is all this round and round as you continue to offer excuses and rationalizations. You backed away from your apologies, apparently at the encouragement of Tony and others, and now you're trying to say that you either did not plagiarize, or that plagiarism isn't dishonest (I can't tell which, you seem to be switching back and forth between the two). Tony is not doing you any favors if he's managed to convince you that there's nothing wrong with plagiarism.

And just to show how honest and forthright you are, you've concocted stories about my motives, how I'm acting at someone else's behest, or am the alter-ego of some other board member. All of your accusations have been completely false and you have no basis for any of them. I guess I don't understand your strategy there.

If plagiarism is a strong word, that should give you some idea about how the offense it describes is generally regarded.

(And I suppose I'm not surprised that Tony is no longer interested in defending his completely untenable position.)

I am not going to say you need therapy, captainfearnot, nor will I say that come off sounding like a loon obsessed with proving he is right.

But I will say this. The phrase you used, "I never called you a derogatory name," appears to have been used at least 10 times in recent years (see link below). You thought that by adding some additional words you could get away with not crediting anyone with it. Plagiary enforcement officials from the Department of Homeland Security will soon be in touch. I hope you have some good answers.

And I should mention that I have it on good word that Bee has been pardoned.

And I should add that Adam has never been held accountable on an internet forum for eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. I am nominating you. How about telling us how terrible his transgression was?

https://www.google.com/search?sourceid= ... 7.3153j0j4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Bee Prepared]

Pardoned! I already picked out my jail jami's and got tattooed. I hear they are rough on copy and pasters in the big house.

[captainfearnot]

I am not going to say you need therapy, captainfearnot,

I very well might need therapy.

nor will I say that come off sounding like a loon obsessed with proving he is right.

I can certainly be tenacious and pedantic. Not traits I admire in myself, I'll admit.

But I will say this. The phrase you used, "I never called you a derogatory name," appears to have been used at least 10 times in recent years (see link below). You thought that by adding some additional words you could get away with not crediting anyone with it. Plagiary enforcement officials from the Department of Homeland Security will soon be in touch. I hope you have some good answers.

See, you're trying to be clever but that's just a terrible, terrible argument. The fact that the phrase is so common is evidence that it was not plagiarized. Even if I did copy and paste it from someone else, who was it? You can't tell. It would be a needle in a haystack. That phrase is so common it cannot be said to have an author.

You're suggesting that my accusation against Bee is similarly specious. But of course it isn't. I know exactly where Bee lifted her material. From Hans at mormon.org and from Matt Shelley of Gilbert, AZ. Because they are the only ones who wrote those paragraphs exactly the way they did. They are the authors of those words. And then Bee (inadvertently, she claims) made it look like she was the author of those words.

I have concocted nothing.

Could you elaborate a bit? Are you saying that you have evidence for all your accusations? Or are you saying that someone else concocted them?

( stalker)

Again, a bit confused. Did you intend this as further name-calling, or yet another false accusation?

[Simon]

Guys, we all only are, because others have been. All we are and do is somehow inspired by others. But it also should not be so hard to just quote the sources, until we have become sources ourselves. Its a good thing to be like Jesus, lets just plagiate him, and calm down.

[Bee Prepared]

Guys, we all only are, because others have been. All we are and do is somehow inspired by others. But it also should not be so hard to just quote the sources, until we have become sources ourselves. Its a good thing to be like Jesus, lets just plagiate him, and calm down.

Good thought Simon!
You show much wisdom. ( I don't quote my sources when I speak German to you, hahaha)
We took a German foreign exchange student to Salt Lake City with the youth. His name is Nils, he was delightful and we still stay in touch.
He knew English very well, but was confused because of the slang we use.