post this in variants, this kind of post don’t belong here. thanks
Tired of games
-
There is nothing wrong with taking someone else’s words and presenting them. The problem comes when you present them as your own. You just took credit for someone else’s ideas- even if you had similar ones of your own- no one knows your ideas, because you cut and pasted someone else’s. You’ve done very little work to present ideas that someone else probably put a lot of work into, and you tacitly take the credit by not giving the credit to the person who did the work. Despicable.
-
Because it is an intellectual fraud.
Jen made claims that “none of us could understand her reasoning” when she went into her zero rant, when it turns out that SHE can’t explain it either. She just did a cut and paste from 2 guys published article (which by the way is a CRIME, and because it is a CRIME can result in the plagerist being banned from this website…)
But forget the criminal ellement for a minute…
She used an intelectual LIE to try to claim superiority over everyone on these boards, and she got CAUGHT. And now, instead of trying to lord her superior knowledge, those of us who have dealt with Jen for a logn time have effectively just placed her and any of her arguments into the trash can.The one thing I will say now though…
Her assertion that zero has a polarity may be correct in this case…
Jen has ZERO credibility left.
And in that case, zero definitely has a negative polarity.
:mrgreen: -
That’s why it’s just better to come up with your own sh*t. If you HAVE to quote someone else, make sure to give them credit after all is said and done. Like, when I repeat a joke my roommate told me to some other friends of mine, and they all laugh, I feel obligated to let them know who told me. (Now, I doubt that my roommate would SUE me for not crediting him here, the concept is still the same… :wink:)
-
I wish i could remember the bizaare “fact” that Jen had generated about Canada. When i challenged her on it using actual sources from historical pages, her source was her grade 3 teacher.
i laughed and laughed . . . -
Prove that I ever quoted my 3rd Grade teacher.
-
Prove that I ever quoted my 3rd Grade teacher.
I think that may be the least of your worries.
-
Prove that I ever quoted my 3rd Grade teacher.
I think that may be the least of your worries.
You mean unwarranted, inflamatory attacks is the least of my worries?
-
I find quite often that someone has said before more eloquantly and more famously something that i believe - often i will quote this person and either reference them, or hope that it is well enough known that i don’t have to bother quoting them. When i hear/see a bizaare, likely untrue fact that i think lends credence to my argument, if i use it, then i will cite the source if i can find it again. Occassionally someone “known” has similar opinions to me coincidently and i do not believe that i borrowed from them - in this case i tend not to quote.
@Jennifer:Prove that I ever quoted my 3rd Grade teacher.
I think that may be the least of your worries.
You mean unwarranted, inflamatory attacks is the least of my worries?
well,
it is just one of a number of warrented, possibly inflamatory, possibly an attack. I guess unless i can pull the old post out of the pre-crash server, then i could demonstrate something that was just amazing to me and as i recall at least one other Canadian with any insight into history. Given that the post does not exist anymore - i humbly retract my statement and issue a new one:
Jen may or may not have quoted her grade three teacher and her bizaare take on Canadian history in the past. if she did - it’s simply another piece of evidence on the ever growing pile. If not i’m sure it doesn’t make any difference, but i would apologise if i believed that it never happened. -
Well, i thank you for the kinda apology.
You don’t like a quote I pull out, or a source, fine. That’s your perrogative. I’m just tired of people demanding sources to validate sources because they don’t like the sources provided. Or the fact I have to provide sources when I make a statement like “My favorite color is purple.” And it’s really come to that. So I’m only going to provide sources when I bloody well feel like it. Since obviously we’ll only get into pissing for distance contests if I repeat the same assinine demands for multiple sources from every bone-headed leftist comment or rightist comment I challenge on these boards.
-
Or the fact I have to provide sources when I make a statement like “My favorite color is purple.” And it’s really come to that.
Prove that anyone ever asked you to source an obvious statement of opinion like “my favorite color is purple”
-
Jen - i have yet to see a demand for a source for an obvious opinion. My goodness - if that were true, then every post of yours would have “source please” replied to. All that is asked for is a source for information that:
- internally lacks credibility
- lacks credibility based on the determined credibility of the poster
- is at odds with previously accepted information.
What i see happening is someone submits a fact, with or without a source, you provide a (in my mind) bizaare and blatant contradiction, but you don’t support it with anything.
when people ask you for a source, they are giving you the opportunity to support your claims instead of dismissing them outright (which i have become increasingly guilty of doing with your posts - in fact when i look at a new forum, if i see that you are the poster, i tend to not even bother looking at the content anymore - same thing w/ BL or M36 or Zooey - as i know all i am going to see is some more unstantiative liberal bashing). If you wish to increase your credibility, have the grace to provide a source AND actually bother to cite it. If you want to be marginallized, then continue to huff that you don’t have to support your claims to someone of obviously limited education or do the work to support your claims, or submit other people’s work as your own.
-
Who do you trust the testimony of more?
The person who has an ideology in complete opposition to your own, but cites sources for any factual claims they make, and distinguishes between their commentary and the truth?
or
The person whose ideology is compatible with your own, but cites nothing that they claim, and interweaves commentary and truth?
Now switch the ideologies.
How about this one, who do you trust more:
The person who makes claims at odds with the general “consensus”, or generalized knowledge base, but cites sources for their argument, and backs up their claims with facts?
or
The person who makes claims in keeping with the general “consensus” or generalized knowledge base, but doesn’t cite anything?
Now switch the claimants.
Starting to understand why people ask you to cite sources?
If you are asked to cite a source, people aren’t saying you are wrong, they are telling you that what you just said does not fit in with their knowledge of the topic. Since no one here knows you personally (I assume) and can attest to your credibility or credentials (I’m not accusing you of posting false education credentials, but you easily could have, just as anyone else could), they have only two things to rely on to judge whether to accept your testimony: their knowledge, and your credibility. When what you say goes against their knowledge, they have to consider how credible you are. Many of us don’t consider you that credible, not in a small way due to the fact that you rarely cite your sources. When you cite your sources, you give people more information with which to consider your testimony and judge its credibility.
-
Who do you trust the testimony of more?
The person who has an ideology in complete opposition to your own, but cites sources for any factual claims they make, and distinguishes between their commentary and the truth?
or
The person whose ideology is compatible with your own, but cites nothing that they claim, and interweaves commentary and truth?
Now switch the ideologies.
How about this one, who do you trust more:
The person who makes claims at odds with the general “consensus”, or generalized knowledge base, but cites sources for their argument, and backs up their claims with facts?
or
The person who makes claims in keeping with the general “consensus” or generalized knowledge base, but doesn’t cite anything?
Now switch the claimants.
Starting to understand why people ask you to cite sources?
If you are asked to cite a source, people aren’t saying you are wrong, they are telling you that what you just said does not fit in with their knowledge of the topic. Since no one here knows you personally (I assume) and can attest to your credibility or credentials (I’m not accusing you of posting false education credentials, but you easily could have, just as anyone else could), they have only two things to rely on to judge whether to accept your testimony: their knowledge, and your credibility. When what you say goes against their knowledge, they have to consider how credible you are. Many of us don’t consider you that credible, not in a small way due to the fact that you rarely cite your sources. When you cite your sources, you give people more information with which to consider your testimony and judge its credibility.
Word. :mrgreen:
-
You don’t like a quote I pull out, or a source, fine. That’s your perrogative.
Actually Jen, what I don;t like is when you plagerize and do not attribute a source to the article.
THAT is against the policies of this board, and you have been caught red handed TWICE now (it is also called “copuright infringement” in case you missed it in the forum rules). You are OUT OF WARNINGS on plagierism Jen.
-
@cystic:
Jen - i have yet to see a demand for a source for an obvious opinion. My goodness - if that were true, then every post of yours would have “source please” replied to.
Have you checked recently? Every post does have that “source” demand in the reply. Every last one. Even when I provide sources you can go a page or two in and see the demand.
@ncscswitch:
THAT is against the policies of this board, and you have been caught red handed TWICE now (it is also called “copuright infringement” in case you missed it in the forum rules). You are OUT OF WARNINGS on plagierism Jen.
Great, so show me once instance of alleged plagerism from 2007. Yea, aint none, huh? I forgot a couple of hyperlinks in over 10,000 posts in over multiple years, that works out to barely a fraction of the area under a bell curve. Barely.
-
It is not a ratio Jen. It is a raw count, and there are two CONFIRMED instances in the past several months.
Three strikes…And this one you went a bit overboard with when you called everyone else ignorant while you hid behind a plagerized essay.
In my personal opinion you went WAY overboard and owe several folks an apology… Jermo and RJ in particular
But that is just my opinion… -
You may have all the opinions you want. It is MY opinion you are completely wrong.
-
Great, so show me once instance of alleged plagerism from 2007. Yea, aint none, huh? I forgot a couple of hyperlinks in over 10,000 posts in over multiple years, that works out to barely a fraction of the area under a bell curve. Barely.
Lets see…it’s ok because you haven’t plagiarized in 2007? LMAO :)
you didn’t just forget a few hyperlinks…you specifically lied and took credit for 2 professors work!!! LMAO :)
What next? But…but…bu…I haven’t plagiarized in 2 whole days now!!! Blubber, blubber…
SUD
Would you do that to an alcoholic who hasn’t drank in 2 days ?
-
@AJGundam:
Great, so show me once instance of alleged plagerism from 2007. Yea, aint none, huh? I forgot a couple of hyperlinks in over 10,000 posts in over multiple years, that works out to barely a fraction of the area under a bell curve. Barely.
Lets see…it’s ok because you haven’t plagiarized in 2007? LMAO :)
you didn’t just forget a few hyperlinks…you specifically lied and took credit for 2 professors work!!! LMAO :)
What next? But…but…bu…I haven’t plagiarized in 2 whole days now!!! Blubber, blubber…
SUD
Would you do that to an alcoholic who hasn’t drank in 2 days ?
I believe the parlance is “Tough Love.”
-
Oh yea, home of the Nigerian scams, that’s a good place.
Hmm, what was the alleged date of his post???
Like, this forum is copywrite protected so you cannot just highlight and paste in another forum that may, or may not have an accurate time stamp.
Anyway, sounds like SUD cannot win an arguement, so he’ll go on a Crusade, Jihad against a member of the board along with his little Moderator friend.
Suggested Topics
