|
Exactly.
Chris - Do you really want to ban members who have obviously taken time and effort to write an article for this site just because they have included a referenced part of MSDN which adds background to there article?
How many members have been banned for this sort of thing who haven't taken the effort to re-join and complain?
|
|
|
|
|
In clarification - if you copy the copyrighted work of someone else, this is plagiarism. While you might not see this is being a big deal, lawyers do tend to take a dim view and the people who comment generally have the well being of CodeProject at heart; in other words, they are trying to protect CP from being sued for copyright infringement. If someone wants to use someone elses words to add context, they should just link to that page.
|
|
|
|
|
I can't see the article but the guy says he did also post links.
It looks to me as if he tried to accommodate Griffs suggestions but he still went running over to get his account removed.
One Question - Do you think banning someone who has taken the effort to write an article ( and by all accounts the majority is all his own work) is going to lead to more people or less people bothering to submit articles?
|
|
|
|
|
In this case, I have no idea what happened with the contents of the article other than the initial comment about plagiarism and then a further report later on that the OP had attempted to repost plagiarised content. In this case, a member of the CP staff had reviewed the item so there must have been some grounds to the complaint.Blue Waffle wrote: One Question - Do you think banning someone who has taken the effort to write an article ( and by all accounts the majority is all his own work) is going to lead to more people or less people bothering to submit articles?
And there's the rub. Do we want to encourage people to submit articles that aren't their own work? What value does that provide? I would rather have one original article than 100 plagiarised articles. Now, I will add that I've long pondered the use of the vote options there and I think there needs to be a third option in there "Plagiarised" as I would agree that Troll/Abusive is too emotive.
|
|
|
|
|
Removing the offending articles is a better approach than banning the account. Maybe banning the posting of articles for a time for someone who has repeatedly committed the offense
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Half his article was copied material. After members and editors pointed him to to copied material, he replaced 15% of the copied material with references and left the rest of the plagiarized material with no links or references.
The majority of his article was not his own work.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
OK.
My gripe was that, you can be a member for 7 years try to enhance the site by writing an article and then get kicked off for it, without a second thought by over zealous peers (rather than proper admin).
Sounds like he might have knowingly tried to pull the wool over your eyes though.
|
|
|
|
|
He was probably headed in the direction of being kicked off by his peers, but I pulled the trigger. Someone who values an article being published over it being published correctly and has no regard or understanding for plagiarism despite multiple explanations isn't someone we can let run amok.
I've replied to one of the many threads he made this morning here: http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4786938/Re-Plagiarised-would-be-article-posted-again.aspx[^]
He may yet return, but only once an understanding of plagiarism is properly demonstrated.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Blue Waffle wrote: knowingly tried to pull the wool over your eyes
And he is still trying: he started this thread with "I am new to CodeProject and started writing article from last 2-3 months..." when the account he is complaining was removed was seven years old. If you cannot work out in that time that we don't like plagiarism...
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Point accepted.
Are his other 2 articles his own?
|
|
|
|
|
No idea - haven't looked (and can't, on a closed account). But with his current liberal attitude to copy'n'paste that I would suspect not...and would go through them with a fine tooth comb...
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
How to Implement Max Length in WPF, Entity Framework Using MVVM Architecture[^]
WPF - Multiple Validation on Single Control[^]
These are my two article please check if it is copy paste work, if found anything please delete them also. These are still available at code project.
Also it does not matter my article is posted or no or my account is deleted or not. The more hurting is your comments and your attitude towards me is like you are treating with criminal.
My current article on which whole scene is created was with title ".net 4.5 Zip with password Feature" this title itself is so unique that none of the site has any info on this. Infact Microsoft has not given any word because password feature is not available in .net library.
I will also prove your statement is wrong on "his majority of work is not his" just give me a day.
By the way this is the link of original article submitted second time on which all this scene is created.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-qQaYNJh6CWTG1fYy12TGhtMjg/edit?usp=sharing[^]
I am here just because getting a title of thief/spammer is very hurting. And I will try my best to remove that title.
|
|
|
|
|
How to Implement Max Length in WPF, Entity Framework Using MVVM Architecture[^]
WPF - Multiple Validation on Single Control[^]
These are my two article please check if it is copy paste work, if found anything please delete them also. These are still available at code project.
Also it does not matter my article is posted or no or my account is deleted or not. The more hurting is your comments and your attitude towards me is like you are treating with criminal.
My current article on which whole scene is created was with title ".net 4.5 Zip with password Feature" this title itself is so unique that none of the site has any info on this. Infact Microsoft has not given any word because password feature is not available in .net library.
I will also prove your statement is wrong on "his majority of work is not his" just give me a day.
By the way this is the link of original article submitted second time on which all this scene is created.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-qQaYNJh6CWTG1fYy12TGhtMjg/edit?usp=sharing[^]
I am here just because getting a title of thief/spammer is very hurting. And I will try my best to remove that title.
|
|
|
|
|
Rohit_DotNet wrote: And I will try my best to remove that title
The trouble is that a good reputation is very hard to get, and very easy to lose.
A bad reputation is very easy to get, and very, very hard to lose.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
By the way this is the link of original article submitted second time on which all this scene is created.
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-qQaYNJh6CWTG1fYy12TGhtMjg/edit?usp=sharing">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-qQaYNJh6CWTG1fYy12TGhtMjg/edit?usp=sharing</a>[<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-qQaYNJh6CWTG1fYy12TGhtMjg/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>]
yes I’ve been a member of the codeproject for 7 years! I guess this should be taken positively, as if I wanted to spam/steal, I would have started doing that the time I created the account. I’ve created this account when I started my career in IT 7 years back , and since then used this account to read and download the really cool stuff here.
It is only recently that I’ve gathered enough courage and commitment to write an article. Though as I understand, I may not have done it in the most "legal" or "professional" way, but you know I’ll learn. I may have made mistakes, but that is how everyone starts, and I expected the team at codeproject to support me or at least be constructive in the feedback, so that I’ll learn and help others as well.
This is why I wrote "I am new", and this team picked it up, colored it and posted without giving any thought to situation in hand, and person in question.
|
|
|
|
|
Why cant the Admin's just block the account and/or article? Why must the member be completed locked out (account deleted)?
Just block the guy. Let him learn from the mistakes - only unblock him ounce he has made amends?
Yes: If you repeatedly keep breaking the "law" (say 2 or three times on the same article) - then lock the account out.
Does this feature not exist? Is this not a better "Admin" practice?
I was locked out once before for making 1 miss guided mistake. Could you not have just blocked the account?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean and mod team,
I did not want to extend this thread further and kill everyone's time.
I’m sorry for creating a scene, which I never intended. I do believe that your Mod team is there to keep the forum clean and free of stolen/bogus stuff, and I acknowledge they indeed do a great work.
Still I am very surprised as well as hurt with the way this particular instance was mitigated by your team. There could have been better ways to sort this then deleting the account and posting misleading comments for me.
First off, please try and understand that if I ever wanted to steal contents/post bogus articles, there are multiple ways to do it. I could create a 1000 random accounts and post articles/or bot post stuff. I don’t know why you failed to trust me in the first place.
Secondly, yes I’ve been a member of the codeproject for 7 years! I guess this should be taken positively, as if I wanted to spam/steal, I would have started doing that the time I created the account. I’ve created this account when I started my career in IT 7 years back , and since then used this account to read and download the really cool stuff here.
It is only recently that I’ve gathered enough courage and commitment to write an article. Though as I understand, I may not have done it in the most “legal” or “professional” way, but you know I’ll learn. I may have made mistakes, but that is how everyone starts, and I expected the team at codeproject to support me or at least be constructive in the feedback, so that I’ll learn and help others as well.
This is why I wrote “I am new”, and your team picked it up, colored it and posted without giving any thought to situation in hand, and person in question.
All said and done, please take this feedback with an open heart. All I request you is to trust your members. I’m neither a thief nor a spammer. I still believe IN your team and code project, thus if you trust me on the above points, please restore my account. I’m suggesting this since I definitely did not want it to end this way, and don’t want to remember codeproject as something to avoid. I love to visit your site, and I want to continue to do so without remembering some sour incident. Over to you!
PS: Special thanks to Blue to at least attempt to understand the issue from my point of view. God bless!
Thanks,
Rohit
|
|
|
|
|
Well the legal perspective is one but plagiarism is and always has been an ethical no-no. If anyone wants to enter a professional arena they must learn that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism[^]
Does this also apply for example to answers in the Q&A?
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Mar-14 10:26am.
|
|
|
|
|
You seem to have replied to the wrong person. Please don't attribute words to me that I did not say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The alt-text says 'Form me!', whereas I think it should be 'Fork me!'
I only saw this as Firefox failed to load that image for some reason.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
|
|
Well spotted, but I'm slightly disappointed you didn't suggest the other alternative.
Then again lack of sleep has given me the humour of a 12 year old at this point.
Moving on... ahem.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
