|
Some of his posts do smell a bit suspicious (and the way he says "Logon to"), but I've known some other members to include links to their blogs/websites in their signatures.
Edit: went through all of his posts... most were actually worse than the few I looked at before.
Definitely spam.
Reported. 
Just one for example Dave Kerr[^]
He's an MVP, and I remember lots of other people who do this, but I can't remember their names. So if it's done the right way it seems legitimate.
Also, there's this guy: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Membership/View.aspx?mid=164[^]
Surely some degree of self/company-promotion is allowed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As usual Lets hit until its die
To learn all there is to know. I know I'll be disappointed one day, but I've made a good start, and the eventual disappointment is likely to be brief.
-Roger Wright
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen plenty of comment in new articles/tips - "plagiarism".
Why administrators don't ban for plagiarism?
Suggestion: If administrator don't what ban, what about special member icon for plagiarism, like MVP or other symbol? I strongly believe this kind of rule will help decrease count of plagiarism.
|
|
|
|
|
Banning is a difficult concept: particularly when you start dealing with intelligent / computer literate people such as you get here. We do delete accounts for plagiarism (though not always, it depends on the circumstances) but...how do you ban someone? Email addresses are ten a penny so that doesn't stop people much, IP addresses are shared for a company, so it is difficult to work out a method of banning that both works and doesn't penalise the innocent. It's easy enough to do when you are doing with the general public (Email + cookie + IP and any two of three is the same person) but technical people can get round all of those without breaking into a sweat...
All we can do is close the account, which means they lose all rep points (which is normally the reason fro posting plagiarised material) and have to start again, or plead "special circumstances" with the admins to get an account reinstated.
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Agree, it's really difficult, it's easy to create new account. Ok, what about special symbol like mvp, may be shame can help? 
|
|
|
|
|
...and they create a new account without the symbol... 
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
...yes but their friends/colleagues will know that he/she is a plagiarist and can shame him
|
|
|
|
|
Plagiarists have friends? Who knew?
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Why not? Statistically somebody know them or can know that he/she is a plagiarist, so this can stop somebody, because the site has representative selection of users
|
|
|
|
|
I would suggest rather than banning people,we should make them aware whats not acceptable...
Training will give better result than suppression.
|
|
|
|
|
People already know what is right and what is wrong, and we don't hide our opinion of people who steal material from others and claim it as their own: they are not welcome here.
This attitude of yours wouldn't have anything to do with your own recent plagiarism - and that your account is at risk, now would it?
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
I would request again,for future warn once and let people correct their mistakes..
It is very harsh and barbaric to just kill an account, for all the intention was to share a good content.
This is not the way to treat beginners
|
|
|
|
|
Don't you know the difference between sharing and stealing? Don't try to justify it.
To learn all there is to know. I know I'll be disappointed one day, but I've made a good start, and the eventual disappointment is likely to be brief.
-Roger Wright
|
|
|
|
|
I could justify, if you are atleast eager to listen...
When anybody is providing all the references then atleast it's not stealing,that i did..
I accepted and corrected my mistakes...rest its all up to you guys...
|
|
|
|
|
>ramol85 Wrote: When anybody is providing all the references then atleast it's not stealing,that i did..
Please read(point no 21):
Code Project Article FAQ[^].
ramol85 Wrote: I accepted and corrected my mistakes...
That's what we need.
To learn all there is to know. I know I'll be disappointed one day, but I've made a good start, and the eventual disappointment is likely to be brief.
-Roger Wright
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! Jas24 (for FAQ).
It was really what was required by me.Should have read it earlier 
Thanks again....
|
|
|
|
|
ramol85 wrote: for all the intention was to share a good content
It would be harsh and barbaric, yes - but that wasn't what you did.
You copied someones elses work, and posted it deliberately ticking the box which says "I have read and agree..." And part of those conditions are that you originated or own own the rights to the material you are publishing.
You were then told "this is plagiarised"
You edited it, made trivial changes, and published it again.
Then you were reported here, and the process of removal began.
Then you edited it, removed the content, replaced it with a link to the original, and tried to publish it again.
That isn't "accidental" or even "ignorant" plagiarism. It's deliberate, it's uncaring, and it's plain wrong by any measure you want to use. And this isn't the first time, is it? How many times have you been banned since you first joined, back in July 2009?
So you aren't "a beginner" - you have definitely been here long enough to know the rules...
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
ramol85 wrote:
I would request again,for future warn once and let people correct their mistakes.. |
You were warned at least three times if I counted correctly but instead of removing the article from the queue, you tried to get it through as a tip.
I like to believe that you have learned the lesson and won't try to post plagiarized material. So, as far as I'm concerned, it would be nice to keep your account alive and have you here. But as long as you play by the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
He's edited it - changed nothing - and posted it back to the queue. 
Weirdly, it's an alternative, but for a "tip" that has already been deleted... 
The Force not strong in this one is, I feel.
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I Respect your thinking not your action.
anyways the article was closed..but the link could been useful as an alternative to the one already in Codeproject
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter.
If you had written a mobile app, and I saw it, copied it, called it "Flappy Bird", posted it to Google Play and the App Store as my own work, and was pulling down $50,000 per day in advertising revenue then you would (quite rightfully) be very pissed off at me.
How is that different from you going "CTRL+A, CTRL+C, ALT+TAB, CTRL+V, 'yes, I wrote this' - Tick, 'Publish' - Click"?
It took minutes to steal what probably took someone a week or more to produce. Is that fair? Honest? To be allowed?
Or (if you had written the original) would you be (quite rightfully) very pissed off with Code Project for permitting it?
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 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
