Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10
Send Topic Print
Will Rudd Destroy Labor? (Read 3990 times)
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 32415
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #90 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:52am
 
perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:39am:
What is Plagiarism?

Many people think of plagiarism as copying another's work, or borrowing someone else's original ideas. But terms like "copying" and "borrowing" can disguise the seriousness of the offense:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?
According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

turning in someone else's work as your own
copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided, however, by citing sources. Simply acknowledging that certain material has been borrowed, and providing your audience with the information necessary to find that source, is usually enough to prevent plagiarism.

Link -
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
=================================
I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!


Thomson spent $60,000 on an overseas trip and all we got from it was a plagiarised report.

now THAT is plagiarism worth mentioning. Your contextual use of 'plagiarism' here is, as usual, wrong.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Sir Bobby
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21894
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #91 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:55am
 
That's really bright Longweekend -
now you attack the moderator.  Cheesy
Back to top
 

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Carl Sagan
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 32415
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #92 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:58am
 
Sir Bobby wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:55am:
That's really bright Longweekend -
now you attack the moderator. Cheesy


I think you mean the 'mover of threads'. 'moderator' is a different function.

I bet you were always the kid in school dobbing on the others and getting beaten up in the playground. is that how you ended up gay?
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
skippy.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 17252
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #93 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 12:20pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:58am:
Sir Bobby wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:55am:
That's really bright Longweekend -
now you attack the moderator. Cheesy


I think you mean the 'mover of threads'. 'moderator' is a different function.

I bet you were always the kid in school dobbing on the others and getting beaten up in the playground. is that how you ended up gay?

LOL,as Gist says, the old codger gets busted plagiarising others posts and instead of correcting it he just keeps digging a bigger hole. If thats not enough, he then taunts other posters as being gay, as if there is something wrong with that, talk about childish ,the silly old bugger is obviously going through menopause. Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Abbott :As far as I am concerned, we want to end the uncertainty by guaranteeing that no school will be worse off . So we will honour the agreements that Labor has entered into.
He lied.
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9387
Perth WA
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #94 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 12:24pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:52am:
perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:39am:
What is Plagiarism?

Many people think of plagiarism as copying another's work, or borrowing someone else's original ideas. But terms like "copying" and "borrowing" can disguise the seriousness of the offense:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?
According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

turning in someone else's work as your own
copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided, however, by citing sources. Simply acknowledging that certain material has been borrowed, and providing your audience with the information necessary to find that source, is usually enough to prevent plagiarism.

Link -
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
=================================
I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!


Thomson spent $60,000 on an overseas trip and all we got from it was a plagiarised report.

now THAT is plagiarism worth mentioning.
Your contextual use of 'plagiarism' here is, as usual, wrong.


How so?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sir Bobby
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21894
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #95 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 1:00pm
 
skippy. wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 12:20pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:58am:
Sir Bobby wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:55am:
That's really bright Longweekend -
now you attack the moderator. Cheesy


I think you mean the 'mover of threads'. 'moderator' is a different function.

I bet you were always the kid in school dobbing on the others and getting beaten up in the playground. is that how you ended up gay?

LOL,as Gist says, the old codger gets busted plagiarising others posts and instead of correcting it he just keeps digging a bigger hole. If thats not enough, he then taunts other posters as being gay, as if there is something wrong with that, talk about childish ,the silly old bugger is obviously going through menopause. Roll Eyes



And he seems to get away with it.  Shocked
Back to top
 

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Carl Sagan
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 32415
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #96 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 2:00pm
 
perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 12:24pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:52am:
perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:39am:
What is Plagiarism?

Many people think of plagiarism as copying another's work, or borrowing someone else's original ideas. But terms like "copying" and "borrowing" can disguise the seriousness of the offense:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?
According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

turning in someone else's work as your own
copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided, however, by citing sources. Simply acknowledging that certain material has been borrowed, and providing your audience with the information necessary to find that source, is usually enough to prevent plagiarism.

Link -
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
=================================
I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!


Thomson spent $60,000 on an overseas trip and all we got from it was a plagiarised report.

now THAT is plagiarism worth mentioning.
Your contextual use of 'plagiarism' here is, as usual, wrong.


How so?


the nonsense about albanese's supposed 'plagiarism' of movei lines was just that: nonsense. he quoted very well known lines which the vast majoriy knew were quotes. to attribute them was unnecessary and a little insulting to his welleducated listeners. 'plagiarism' also needs to prove intent, not just action.

If I say 'you can't handle the truth!' I dont have to attribute it because everyone knows where it is from.  Often the charges of plagiarism arise from ill-educated and inexperienced people whose exposure to the wide world is limited. in the case of booby, the description fits very well.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9387
Perth WA
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #97 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 2:17pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 2:00pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 12:24pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:52am:
perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:39am:
What is Plagiarism?

Many people think of plagiarism as copying another's work, or borrowing someone else's original ideas. But terms like "copying" and "borrowing" can disguise the seriousness of the offense:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?
According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

turning in someone else's work as your own
copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided, however, by citing sources. Simply acknowledging that certain material has been borrowed, and providing your audience with the information necessary to find that source, is usually enough to prevent plagiarism.

Link -
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
=================================
I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!


Thomson spent $60,000 on an overseas trip and all we got from it was a plagiarised report.

now THAT is plagiarism worth mentioning.
Your contextual use of 'plagiarism' here is, as usual, wrong.


How so?


the nonsense about albanese's supposed 'plagiarism' of movei lines was just that: nonsense. he quoted very well known lines which the vast majoriy knew were quotes. to attribute them was unnecessary and a little insulting to his welleducated listeners. 'plagiarism' also needs to prove intent, not just action.

If I say 'you can't handle the truth!' I dont have to attribute it because everyone knows where it is from. Often the charges of plagiarism arise from ill-educated and inexperienced people whose exposure to the wide world is limited. in the case of booby, the description fits very well.


Q.What has any of that got to do with the legal & cost issues involving Plagiarism, as raised in the website which is specifically about Plagiarism?

A. Nothing!


As I have already said, I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!


That even includes idiots like you, LW!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 32415
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #98 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 3:37pm
 
Quote:
A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.


its that kind of drivel that makes you sound like a pedantic pinhead.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
FRED.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3310
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #99 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 4:20pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 3:37pm:
Quote:
A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.


its that kind of drivel that makes you sound like a pedantic pinhead.


Legal ACTION against some one on this FORUM   Grin Grin Grin VISIONS OF GRANDURE  Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
FRED.bell58@yahoo.com.au FRED.bell58@yahoo.com.au  
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9387
Perth WA
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #100 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 5:07pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 3:37pm:
Quote:
A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.


its that kind of drivel that makes you sound like a pedantic pinhead.


If you don't like the advice of the plagiarism website, in the following post or my complimentary suggestions, that's your choice, but I would suggest the advice is correct & proper!


perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:39am:
What is Plagiarism?

Many people think of plagiarism as copying another's work, or borrowing someone else's original ideas. But terms like "copying" and "borrowing" can disguise the seriousness of the offense:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?
According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

turning in someone else's work as your own
copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided, however, by citing sources. Simply acknowledging that certain material has been borrowed, and providing your audience with the information necessary to find that source, is usually enough to prevent plagiarism.

Link -
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
=================================
I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9387
Perth WA
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #101 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 5:08pm
 
FRED. wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 4:20pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 3:37pm:
Quote:
A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.


its that kind of drivel that makes you sound like a pedantic pinhead.


Legal ACTION against some one on this FORUM Grin Grin Grin VISIONS OF GRANDURE Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin


If you don't like the advice of the plagiarism website, in the following post or my complimentary suggestions, that's your choice, but I would suggest the advice is correct & proper!


perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:39am:
What is Plagiarism?

Many people think of plagiarism as copying another's work, or borrowing someone else's original ideas. But terms like "copying" and "borrowing" can disguise the seriousness of the offense:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?
According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

turning in someone else's work as your own
copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided, however, by citing sources. Simply acknowledging that certain material has been borrowed, and providing your audience with the information necessary to find that source, is usually enough to prevent plagiarism.

Link -
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
=================================
I recommend that all members, if using someone else's material, credit the source of that material.

A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.

Whilst the result of any such legal action, would be for the courts to decide, the risk of incurring what can be massive legal costs alone, should be a sufficient deterrent for most people, not to risk whether something is or is not plagiarism!


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 32415
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #102 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 5:12pm
 
FRED. wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 4:20pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 3:37pm:
Quote:
A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.


its that kind of drivel that makes you sound like a pedantic pinhead.


Legal ACTION against some one on this FORUM Grin Grin Grin VISIONS OF GRANDURE Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin


that was kinda my point. it was a trivial issue on a barely noticable forum.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Gist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5475
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #103 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 5:14pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:45am:
if everyone was called to account for minor mistakes, then what would happen here? it was obvious to anyone with a brain that it was copied as it is not even close to my style of writing. its only a problem to a nice person like booby.

as if we dont have any ther things to discuss.


Well, I guess we don't because had you gone down the path I set out, the issue would have been dead in its tracks there and then. Instead, we're still banging on about it a page later (and building).
Back to top
 

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australias interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)
 
IP Logged
 
Sir Bobby
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21894
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Will Rudd Destroy Labor?
Reply #104 - Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:11pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 3:37pm:
Quote:
A failure to do so, could place those members not doing so, in greater danger of facing legal action.


its that kind of drivel that makes you sound like a pedantic pinhead.




Longweekend called the moderator a pedantic pinhead.

How can he get away with it?
Back to top
 

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Carl Sagan
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10
Send Topic Print