Comments on: Ethics of Blogiarism http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/ information ethics : new media : privacy : values in design : 2.0 Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:32:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Randy Charles Morin http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/comment-page-1/#comment-148 Randy Charles Morin Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:51:56 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/#comment-148 You still don't get it. The definition is public domain. Always includes when the definition is public domain. Otherwise, you wouldn't use always, you would use sometime or most of the time. Or do you have a hard time with English? I find your continued lack of understanding, very amusing. >>proper attribution is always required You still don’t get it. The definition is public domain. Always includes when the definition is public domain. Otherwise, you wouldn’t use always, you would use sometime or most of the time. Or do you have a hard time with English? I find your continued lack of understanding, very amusing.

>>proper attribution is always required

]]> By: Michael Zimmer http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/comment-page-1/#comment-147 Michael Zimmer Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:44:28 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/#comment-147 Sir, I'm sorry, but I'm not sure where I am "attacking" you. I didn't provide attribution when I created the Wikipedia page because I thought I was building from a dictionary definition within acceptable "fair use" principles. It was my error to not realize that it was your term, and not a definition in the "public domain" (for lack of a better term). I wasn't meaning to take someone else's work and pass it off as my own. I was building upon an existing definition, and posting it on a wiki-based system for the entire community to be able to modify - as has been done. Sir, I’m sorry, but I’m not sure where I am “attacking” you.

I didn’t provide attribution when I created the Wikipedia page because I thought I was building from a dictionary definition within acceptable “fair use” principles. It was my error to not realize that it was your term, and not a definition in the “public domain” (for lack of a better term).

I wasn’t meaning to take someone else’s work and pass it off as my own. I was building upon an existing definition, and posting it on a wiki-based system for the entire community to be able to modify – as has been done.

]]> By: Randy Charles Morin http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/comment-page-1/#comment-146 Randy Charles Morin Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:24:59 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/#comment-146 I guess you are saying that "proper attribution is always required" doesn't apply to you. Always means 100% of the time. Trying to defend yourself by attacking me, only makes you more the jerk in my view I guess you are saying that “proper attribution is always required” doesn’t apply to you. Always means 100% of the time. Trying to defend yourself by attacking me, only makes you more the jerk in my view

]]> By: Michael Zimmer http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Michael Zimmer Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:13:45 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/#comment-145 Randy Charles Morin's comment refers to my creation of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blogiarism" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia page on "blogiarism"</a>. When I noticed a page didn't yet exist, I did a quick search to see if there were any definitions on the web, and found <a href="http://www.kbcafe.com/iBLOGthere4iM/?guid=20051018203244" rel="nofollow">this brief one</a>: "When a blogger posts primarily content cut-and-paste from another source without linking to that source." I used that as a foundation for a broader definition on Wikipedia: "Blogiarism is the when a blogger posts content cut-and-pasted from another source without linking to that source, providing commentary, or any other editing, often with the intent of earning online advertising revenue by attracting readers to their site rather than the originator's" My mistake was assuming that the definition stub I found online was just from a dictionary, when it seemingly was Mr. Morin's "intellectual property." The Wikipedia page now has an attribution to Mr. Morin, and you can read the discussion of it <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Blogiarism" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Randy Charles Morin’s comment refers to my creation of a Wikipedia page on “blogiarism”. When I noticed a page didn’t yet exist, I did a quick search to see if there were any definitions on the web, and found this brief one: “When a blogger posts primarily content cut-and-paste from another source without linking to that source.” I used that as a foundation for a broader definition on Wikipedia: “Blogiarism is the when a blogger posts content cut-and-pasted from another source without linking to that source, providing commentary, or any other editing, often with the intent of earning online advertising revenue by attracting readers to their site rather than the originator’s”

My mistake was assuming that the definition stub I found online was just from a dictionary, when it seemingly was Mr. Morin’s “intellectual property.” The Wikipedia page now has an attribution to Mr. Morin, and you can read the discussion of it here.

]]> By: Randy Charles Morin http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/comment-page-1/#comment-144 Randy Charles Morin Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:59:44 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/2006/01/16/ethics-of-blogiarism/#comment-144 You wrote: While the blogging medium certainly makes it easy to cut & paste & post to your own site, as if the words were your own, proper attribution is always required. I laughed. That makes you the ultimate hypocrit. You wrote: While the blogging medium certainly makes it easy to cut & paste & post to your own site, as if the words were your own, proper attribution is always required.

I laughed. That makes you the ultimate hypocrit.

]]>