- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 26,124
- Reaction score
- 52,122
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Well, no problem. ESPN is fine with cut and paste. Now, videotaping, that's something else entirely.I'd guess that's the case here - except it was a cut and paste.
Must be nice to have the world so black and white.Disagree. Plagiarism is plagiarism. That's all there is to it.
Must be nice to have the world so black and white.
It seems to me that most things have shades of gray, even, yes, when someone's words end up on a web site without attribution.
There is taking someone else's words and knowingly copying them and saying they are your own.
There is taking someone else's words and using them in an article intending to attribute the original writer but forgeting.
There is taking someone else's words and using them in an article intending to credit the original writer and doing so be somehow computers/internet do not work as you thoght and the atribution does not show up.
All constutute plagarism on the face of it, but to say that plagarism is plagarism and that is all there is to it is too simplistic.
I am certainly not opposed to tweaking FBSPN, but I think I leave the pitchfork and lantern in the shed this time, at least until I learn more.
Must be nice to have the world so black and white.
That is the equivalent of saying you cheat a little or you cheat a whole lot, or it's a little lie or a big lie. Regardless, of the degree applicable, you still cheat or lie.
This is pretty funny coming from a Pats fan.
The PFT piece had no original content.