Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plagiarism

notes.unwieldy.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 326 posts

Re: Plagiarism

#261

Post by chris_wot »

zeedotme wrote: post #134

Zee again. Full response: http://bit.ly/JxoWae

You have got to be joking. A Google doc that can be taken down and that isn't easily indexable to be associated with thenextweb. Why isn't this on TNW?

As for the comment "The debate on paraphrasing, rewriting and quoting we should save for another post" shows a remarkable level of cluelessness. That is the substance of the matter!!!

I can't even say that the title is not an attempt at dissembling. Making the title "Plagiarism?" indicates that you don't believe you plagiarised.

This is the worst non-apology apology I've ever seen.

Re: Plagiarism

#262

Post by chris_wot »

dyscrete wrote: post #201

Zee has apologized. https://twitter.com/#!/Zee/status/202154649183203329

A twitter reply to someone who called him out, to a Google Docs non-apology which is behind a link shortener. Pardon me if I'm unimpressed.

Re: Plagiarism

#264

Post by spc476 »

ilamont wrote: post #225
pitdesi wrote: post #138

There needs to be some sort of standard for citing other peoples work, sort of like an updated Chicago Manual of Style ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation#Citation_styles ) for online publications. These days we have all these content mills that put out very little original work... I don't know what the proper method should be, how much work you can take etc. Also remember this - The New York Times spent weeks wr…

Former journalist here. Some years ago I attempted to create a standard called "Source Blocks" (see http://www.ilamont.com/2008/11/my-new-journalism-experiment.... ). It's basically a paragraph of explanatory text that the author places at the end of the article, identifying what sources he/she used in the course of researching the article. It looked something like this. Sources cited, referenced, or consulted: Blog.…

It's not hard. Firefox under Unix has an interesting property. When you select text, you end up with the following targets for an X Window select operation:

    TIMESTAMP
    TARGETS
    MULTIPLE
    text/html
    text/_moz_htmlcontext
    text/_moz_htmlinfo
    UTF8_STRING
    COMPOUND_TEXT
    TEXT
    STRING
    text/x-moz-url-priv
With this, I was able to add an extension to my editor to obtain the URL, pull the page, pull the title and generate an HTML BLOCKQUOTE with proper CITE attribute with the highlighted text included.

Re: Plagiarism

#265

Post by lloyddobbler »

zeedotme wrote: post #11
petercooper wrote: post #3

The old adage is you can't copyright facts and there was certainly no requirement for TNW to do any "original research" to share these findings. However, when you copy/use facts, you wade into hot water if you also copy the structure and the way those facts were originally expressed. The original TNW article shown here seems to step over that line with a barely masked copy of the original paragraphs. What bothers me…

I'd honestly much rather be brutally honest than go down the artificial PR route.

Zee, Judith Griggs with Cooks Source was 'brutally honest' as well. You would probably do well to give her story a read:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/web-decries-infring...

It obviously has some keen similarities to your situation (particularly in the "editor's response" department).

While I'm a fan of fair use (it's what makes the world wide web go round), I'm also a fan of attribution...and more importantly, of handling PR like someone who's the public face of a company. I think the responses here on HN show that most of us think similarly.

Re: Plagiarism

#267

Post by aurelianito »

zeedotme wrote: post #142
drewblaisdell wrote: post #79

Update: image credit added after I posted this. Still, the image should be removed, this is copyright infringement. TheNextWeb is infamous for plagiarizing images for that section. Take this article, for example: http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2011/05/23/stylish-techno... The image at the top of the article is taken from this Dustin Curtis blog post: http://www.dustincurtis.com/press_on.html (the filename of the…

we have a strict policy in place to make sure this doesn't happen. If it does, and it really shouldn't have beyond a year ago (when we really clamped down on it with our authors)... we fix it. If it ever does happen, I assure you that all it takes is one email to office@thenextweb.com and we'll have it resolved. But I assure you that this "care free" image you might have of us when it comes to posting other peoples i…

I up-voted the parent comment because it is quite relevant to the history. OTOH, I find the opinion expressed in the parent comment quite disgusting.

I DO NOT think that down-voting relevant content we don't agree with is a good idea. Do you agree with me?

Re: Plagiarism

#268

Post by aurelianito »

javajosh wrote: post #161
zeedotme wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd honestly much rather be brutally honest than go down the artificial PR route.

I upvoted you (really) because I totally agree with you: CEOs like you should be completely, brutally honest. Especially when this reveals you to be oafish and unprincipled. This policy is good for customers (so they can avoid your products) good for investors (so they can avoid investing in your company) and good for prospective employees (so they can not).

I up-voted the grand-parent because it is great to have the opinion of the other party involved, even thou I don't agree with it.

Re: Plagiarism

#269

Post by CurtMonash »

TheNextWeb could have provided substantially the same article to its readers by block quoting with attribution rather than plagiarizing with attribution.

Would that have been fair use? While a significant minority of people would say "No", I'm in the majority that would say "Yes".

But hey -- I once blogged something only to have Mashable post the same news, taking credit for it as original research (but without plagiarizing the wording). I think that behavior was worse. Pete Cashmore promised me he'd fix it, then didn't follow through.

Re: Plagiarism

#270

Post by tlrobinson »

csomar wrote: post #181
astrodust wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a new breed of CEOs who use 'ur' in public correspondence. If that isn't a red flag, I don't know what is.

I'm not bothered much by "ur" (since it's Twitter, and you have only 140 characters) than by his tone.

I refuse to shorten words to "SMS speak", even on Twitter. I can't stand when supposedly intelligent adults do it.
Post reply on HN