Recently I noticed that a poster in the History Forum had copied verbatim parts of many of his (or her) posts from a commonly available reference work. The poster did not provide any attribution for the copied material and it was not placed in quote marks.

I am interested in hearing what the rest of you have to say or feel about this.

I think it's dishonest, but I also don't consider this to be a place where "academic standards" apply. I certainly don't think it's right to do such a thing, though.

I'd say that there are no universally applicable standards here, given that it's just a place for people to talk. However, the more rigorous the standards you use, the more seriously people will take you. If, for example, you make some wild comment without anything to back it up, that's your prerogative, but don't expect people to believe you. If you want to make a case, give evidence.

The problem with the case you mention is that no-one would actually know that plagiarism had occurred unless, like you, they'd happened to have read the book being plagiarised. It seems to me that the poster in question is actually shooting himself in the foot, to some degree, given that citing the book in question would presumably reinforce his argument. It would, at least, mean he could throw a source at those who disagree with him, rather than rely simply upon assertion. So this sort of plagiarism isn't in the same league as someone who plagiarises in published work, or in work done for a degree, or something like that: the poster isn't benefiting materially, any more than if one were to plagiarise in conversation (if such a thing is possible). But it's a very odd thing to do and strikes me as slightly seedy, if only because the poster gains informal credit (at least on these fora) for ideas and words which are not his own.

So at the end of that ramble, I'm still going to vote for the second option, as it's where my instincts point.

Well, I think it is better to give the source, from what you have it, if you post it here verbal. It is plagiarism indeed. However this is only a forum. So it is not a "must be", it should be a (very strong) "should be", as some posters do know little about that.
Perhaps this should be announced more in the rules.

Adler

When you do something like this your taking credit and kudos for something you didn't do - that's just not cricket, IMHO, even on an internet forum.

I frown heavily on this, but since I can't check every source (yes, I am indeed damn lazy, as can be attested to by many posters! :p)...

Being the mod nominally in charge of History, I'd ask that posters try not to do this and give citations where needed.

absolutely it matters!

my prof's at uni used to beat us over the head about this stuff and it was a real serious offense. i had one teacher threaten expulsion if caught (not me of course - just 'in general').

now - i know that this forum is not 'school' or 'academia' or anything. however, i believe that there should be a certain unspoken thing about being honest about what's posted. i mean, if it's not yours, say so damnit!

at the same time - i don't think footnotes and Chicago style citations are necessary. a list or link to a source is always appreciated though (considering that the source is a credible one though).

it doesn't surprise me in the least bit that this kind of crap would occur though. and when you're trained to do research and to express one's self through words, it is wholly unacceptable imho to post info w/out making any type of disclaimer or whatever. it's mickey mouse BS actually...

I might mention that I have to teach undergraduates at university, and the one thing which is drummed into us constantly - to a degree you'd really think unnecessary - is that we have to watch out for plagiarism. Anything suspicious must be Googled or referred to someone more senior. Even when I handed in the first set of students' marks, the only thing the department secretary said was, "Did you find any plagiarism?" - as if I had, but forgotten to mention it! It seems odd to me as I don't think anyone mentioned the issue even once when I was an undergraduate. Perhaps it was assumed that we'd be intelligent enough to guess that it's a Bad Thing, although perhaps too it was less of a problem then, since there wasn't this Interweb thingy to make it easier.

Although, isn't it possible that the poster is quoting from his/her own work? For instance, Plotinus is a published historian... If I found his texts somewhere else, I would just assume that whatever the name under which they appear is Plotinus' real name and leave it at that.

Is it possible that the other poster you are referring to did the same? Or used whatever he or she put up at Wikipedia or some other source? In the interest of anonymity, I could understand somebody not referencing their own work on an Internet forum...

EDIT: I had missed that it came from a "commonly available reference work" [7ronin, 2006. Board: CFC. Forum: World History. Thread: Plagiarism (?) in the World History Forum. Post: #1]. Then it is highly unlikely to be their own. I change my vote from undecided to the second option.

People should have the decency to state where they got the information from rather than claim it as their own.

Having said that some of the older articles I've written I hadn't got into the habit yet of listing sources and now that I'm not inclined to go back and dig up the old sources for my older articles. I don't usually copy entire text though, just read sources, digest and write a summary/analysis in my own words.

I voted 'Yes'.

The source should be indicated... at least mentioned if not linked.

Besides the plagiarism/ copyright arguments... giving the source makes it easier for the reader to do further reading if he or she is so inclined.

Who is the poster you refer to by the way 7ronin?

it wasn't me I hope

No, no, don't tell us. I want to see a Tell Tale Heart type ending.

No, no, don't tell us. I want to see a Tell Tale Heart type ending.

That's what I was kind of hoping for, but I won't hold my breath. :rolleyes:
My own opinion is that this is just wrong; particularly when it may have been done to make the poster appear smarter, more knowledgeable, or more literate than everyone else.

nobody saw me do it!
nobody can prove anything!
(bart simpson, the simpsons. unknown chapter)

it, i believe, is the worst kind of writer that steals someone elses ideas.

this being a NON academic foroum, does not need it to be a hardset rule.
just use a bit of common sense.

if its common knoledge then i guess its ok, but for me i like cross referencing facts and ideas.

It would be better to name the person in order that he/she can at least explain themselves rather than leave a cloud over the entire forum.

Although, isn't it possible that the poster is quoting from his/her own work? For instance, Plotinus is a published historian... If I found his texts somewhere else, I would just assume that whatever the name under which they appear is Plotinus' real name and leave it at that.

Even when you're quoting yourself you ought to say so. If nothing else, it helps to give a bit of weight to your argument as it gives the impression that rather than simply making this stuff up you've researched it sufficiently well to be allowed to write about it elsewhere. Plus, of course, as you say, there's the chance that people might see the book and not realise it's by the same person, since we all use bizarre pseudonyms here. I have quoted myself on these fora before and always made it clear when doing so, and I've seen other people do the same too.

I agree with pretty much everything in this thread that's been said

yes the person should be named because it could have simply been an honest mistake, in which case they should be allowed to defend their name

also yeah, sources should be named. that was one of the most important things taught to me by my History teacher.

I have seen plenty of well-informed intellectual debates on gaming forums, so I feel that when somebody decides to quote somebody else's work to back up an argument here, he/she should clearly acknowledge the fact that it is a quote. I have written several (low quality!) fanfic stories for a non-Civ game on another site, and I would feel pretty annoyed with someone who reproduced them and claimed that they were his work.

I disagree that the poster should be made public. Instead I would suggest you PM the poster with links to his/her posts and the source and question them about it. Give them the chance to explain themselves without publicly ridiculing them. Just my two cents.

Rest assured that I have no intentions of publicly humiliating anyone. I am reasonably assured (given this posts number of views) that our errant poster has seen this thread and will (hopefully) moderate his or her future behavior.

I notice that none of the "no" voters has commented. I would hope that the voting has not broken out along the lines of age with younger voters opting for "yes" and older voters for "no."

I would suggest if that is the way you intend to approach it that if the person continues that you then do something a little more pro-active.

Lighten up its a games forum!

Well while it is immoral to copy somebody's work and claim it as your own i don't think it is that much of a problem here

I voted undecided. On one hand, plagiarism is a serious concern. On the other hand, this isn't a place of serious academic study. We are all anonymous to a degree and won't be getting any aclaim (or, better grades, which was the reason anyone I know did it) for writing it. People should try to offer sources, but information is good to learn from, regardless of who it came from.

It is only an issue if people claim that the plagiarised text is their own work.

A well reasoned argument is much stronger if the person uses cited material well. Word for word without citing is a no-no, and actually weakens the person's argument. Plus it's just wrong. That is why I picked standards should apply.

I personally like Augustine, Descartes, Aquinas, and other people who actually wrote "the Works of today" seen through the view of their present, and compare these texts to later writers who have their own views of how the past once was, seen through the lens of their times. Our opinions are always going to be the opinions of someone who wasn't there, and our worldview will color everything we see, no matter how much empathy we bring to the problem of trying to imagine ourselves there and then.

Then again, it is really only a game forum...

It is only an issue if people claim that the plagiarised text is their own work.

But if you post something, aren't you implicitly claiming that it's your own work unless you state otherwise? Simply by making this very post, I'm also making a sort of unspoken claim that I wrote it, apart from the passage which is clearly flagged as a quote. So to do what amounts to a copy-'n'-paste post without any indication that it differs from a normal post really is lying, in a sort of a way. Now it may be less serious than (say) doing it when writing a book, because it's only a game forum, but still, it's still a lie - it just might have fewer repercussions, that's all.

Rest assured that I have no intentions of publicly humiliating anyone. I am reasonably assured (given this posts number of views) that our errant poster has seen this thread and will (hopefully) moderate his or her future behavior.And let's keep it that way. It might just be a mere oversight - this being a gaming forum and so forth.

If in future anyone has any problems with this issue, pls report the posts, citing sources and let me handle it. ;)

The source should be indicated... at least mentioned if not linked.

Besides the plagiarism/ copyright arguments... giving the source makes it easier for the reader to do further reading if he or she is so inclined.
A person should try to indicate where they got the info from, but if they can't remember, they should at least have the decency to say so. They hit us real hard nowadays about plagiarism at school (college that is). I generally use that time to post on here while the person is talking about it, as it is about the billionth time I've heard it since my Freshman year of high school. I also like to include a link, to prove to you that I am right, and you are wrong. :mischief:

It would be better to name the person in order that he/she can at least explain themselves rather than leave a cloud over the entire forum.
Indeed it would be. I'm starting to rethink all the stuff I've posted to check that it isn't blatantly plagiarised.

Plagiarism is a bad thing, but now I have to worry about it in a place where I go for a little R'n'R?!?!? (That Report Bad Post thing Knight-Dragon said). My paranoia meter is starting to spike the more I think about it. :twitch:

Isn't this a little more of an OT type thread?

Why not send a PM to the guy, and a PM to all the others saying they are not the target oft he thread, so Tank Guy doesn't have to worry?

I find the relaxed writing and citing rules of CFC to be a real relief. However, integrity, honesty and respect for other posters' intelligence should not suffer in the process.

Voted "yes".

Well I agree with what most are saying, link to where you got the info in case someone wants to read more or at the very least give credit where credit is due. Don't cut and past you info and claim it as yours unless it is in fact yours then say so.
After all unless you were there and speak of personnal memory or discovery then most information about history is plagiarism in a sense after all you had to have read or heard it somewhere it's a little difficult to witness history prior to your birth. Regardless of how it is compiled in the end some one else said or did it first. (Akin to compiling mods you might put a number of them tagether to make one and tweak a few things, but some one else wrote the original give them credit.)