Discussion of the ''DCP / plagiarism'' thread

[_MsJack]

Liz ~ Hypothetical scenario here: Dan and/or William Hamblin and/or Louis Midgley and/or anyone from the old school FARMS crowd discover that some loathed critic of Mormonism (James White, Ed Decker, the Tanners, Brent Metcalf, take your pick) has repeatedly engaged in plagiarism.

Do you think that they wouldn't call as much attention to that as possible? That they wouldn't use that information for all it's worth towards discrediting that person?

Do you think they would care that the man (or woman) has a family to support, that there could be professional consequences? Didn't seem like they cared about any of that when they were doing their exposé on James White's unaccredited ThD.

You're asking people to treat Dan in a way that he hasn't been treating others. That is all.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

I am stunned, Jessie Pinkman, that you are concerned enough about the REPORTING of plagiarism to write this many lengthy posts about it, while at the same time saying you don't have the time or inclination to determine for yourself whether the PLAGIARISM actually occurred. You just trust that it didn't.

I really don't understand. If he didn't plagiarize, then the reports wouldn't ruin his career. If making the reports really would end his career it would be because they were true. Your arguments sound to me like you are advocating that people should just trust him when he says he didn't plagiarize, and that all will be fine if people just stop talking about the plagiarism. And although you say you are not shifting the burden to those noting the plagiarism, your continued posts warning those reporting the plagiarism that they have an obligation to realize what a serious situation this is are doing exactly that.

I have fully documented every instance of plagiarism I have discussed. If it happened once or twice I could see that it might have been unintentional, but I personally have documented 8 or 9 cases of blatant intellectual theft, just in the last few months. Your continued insistence that I realize how serious these accusations are is misdirected, if you need to keep talking about the seriousness of plagiarism, then you really should do it with the one who is plagiarizing.

Don’t worry, Lemmie. I’ve said my peace. The last “lengthy” post I made was trying to clarify some misunderstandings that Doc had about where I was coming from. Obviously you don’t understand where I’m coming from, and I am not going to continue talking about it because it is obvious that we are at an impasse.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

Liz ~ Hypothetical scenario here: Dan and/or William Hamblin and/or Louis Midgley and/or anyone from the old school FARMS crowd discover that some loathed critic of Mormonism (James White, Ed Decker, the Tanners, Brent Metcalf, take your pick) has repeatedly engaged in plagiarism.

Do you think that they wouldn't call as much attention to that as possible? That they wouldn't use that information for all it's worth towards discrediting that person?

Do you think they would care that the man (or woman) has a family to support, that there could be professional consequences? Didn't seem like they cared about any of that when they were doing their exposé on James White's unaccredited ThD.

You're asking people to treat Dan in a way that he hasn't been treating others. That is all.

I didn’t read the expose you are referring to so I can’t comment on that. When Dan has treated people unfairly, I have told him so.

[_Lemmie]

Don’t worry, Lemmie. I’ve said my peace. The last “lengthy” post I made was trying to clarify some misunderstandings that Doc had about where I was coming from. Obviously you don’t understand where I’m coming from, and I am not going to continue talking about it because it is obvious that we are at an impasse.

and your last lengthy post was exactly what I was responding to, so clearly you didn't understand where I was coming from either.

Please feel free to talk about it as much as you like, I just think it is disingenuous in the extreme to continue to insist that those documenting the plagiarism have an obligation to choose their actions based on the consequences. You don't want your friend to suffer any consequences, but you seem confused as to what causes the consequences. They result not from observing the plagiarism, but from committing it.

[_MsJack]

I didn’t read the expose you are referring to so I can’t comment on that.

Then feel free to catch up some time.

When Dan has treated people unfairly, I have told him so.

I very much doubt that or the two of you wouldn't be "friends." (I tried to tell Dan he had treated someone unfairly just once and he threw a hissy fit and published our private correspondence without my permission.)

[_Ceeboo]

Jessie,

As someone who recognizes and appreciates the deep value of friendship (Having friends as well as being a friend to others) - Please at least consider that you need not die on this particular hill to remain a friend.......... or to prove your friendship.

Given the circumstances, perhaps a neutral stance that is cemented in empathy and compassion to and for your friend is your best play. After all, you didn't deal these cards - these cards were dealt and already played a long time ago.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_moksha]

Given the circumstances, perhaps a neutral stance that is cemented in empathy and compassion to and for your friend is your best play.
Peace,
Ceeboo

Spoken like a true statesman, Ceeboo.

Liz demonstrates the admirable qualities of loyalty and unwillingness to cast stones.

[_Runtu]

I didn’t read the expose you are referring to so I can’t comment on that. When Dan has treated people unfairly, I have told him so.

Do you think Lemmie and/or Ms Jack are treating DCP unfairly? Given that Dr. Peterson has added a citation to his piece, it seems even he agrees there was plagiarism in the original.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

Don’t worry, Lemmie. I’ve said my peace. The last “lengthy” post I made was trying to clarify some misunderstandings that Doc had about where I was coming from. Obviously you don’t understand where I’m coming from, and I am not going to continue talking about it because it is obvious that we are at an impasse.

and your last lengthy post was exactly what I was responding to, so clearly you didn't understand where I was coming from either.

Please feel free to talk about it as much as you like, I just think it is disingenuous in the extreme to continue to insist that those documenting the plagiarism have an obligation to choose their actions based on the consequences. You don't want your friend to suffer any consequences, but you seem confused as to what causes the consequences. They result not from observing the plagiarism, but from committing it.

Document away. What I have indicated, and I still stand by, is that the accounts that have been documented are not INTENTIONAL examples of plagiarism. And Dan has acknowledged publicly that there have been issues of UNINTENTIONAL issues of plagiarism which he has apologized and accepted responsibility for.

If you guys are teeming through the man's work, taking time from your busy days to document instances of plagiarism, there is obviously some sort of purpose to your goal. Are you as diligent about going through other author's works? Do you have threads on other message boards dedicated to their documentations of plagiarism?

Let me ask you this, Lemmie. And this is a genuine question. What is your desired outcome from all of this?

[_Jesse Pinkman]

I didn’t read the expose you are referring to so I can’t comment on that. When Dan has treated people unfairly, I have told him so.

Do you think Lemmie and/or Ms Jack are treating DCP unfairly? Given that Dr. Peterson has added a citation to his piece, it seems even he agrees there was plagiarism in the original.

What I am talking about is the continued teeming over DCP's work, delighting in further incidents to document.