JzG has four choices Options

[thekohser]

This may be the best WikBack post so far, if I may say so myself:

JzG, we will all wait here, in this cage match, for your answer about why you typed:

"The company's operates mines in..."

You probably have a few choices for your response:

(1) "Mr. Kohs, I will not dignify your accusations with an answer. I will rely on the rest of the WikBack community to ignore any further discussion of this matter."

(2) "This was obviously a simple typing mistake. I do have scar tissue on my left hand, you know. I'm still confused how my left hand got over to the apostrophe key on the keyboard, but that's my explanation."

(3) "I may have not fully WP:FORGETted Mr. Kohs' original article, and somehow the memory of the phrase 'The company's' was still sticking in my head. It was not plagiarism, so much as the powerful impression Mr. Kohs' writing left on me."

(4) "Okay, so I started my editing with Kohs' version, and I started re-arranging words to make it look like my own original thought and research. I know I did this in only 26 minutes, all while participating in the DRV discussion, too. Yes, I know that 15 months later, I went back into the article's history and tried to erase from memory the original source and labor for this article. And, yes, I then lied repeatedly about the situation here on the WikBack. I'm sorry for what I've done. I know it's no excuse, but Mr. Kohs has a certain talent for making me do very irrational things, since he pushes all the right buttons, as far as I'm concerned. Please accept my apology."

I think that's about it. Four possible responses. I've even done you the favor of numbering them. So, you could just reply with "Number 2 most closely captures my position," and then you'd be done with it. I'm helpful that way.

We're all waiting, JzG.

He's trapped like a wounded animal, folks. That's when they're most dangerous, so look out!

Greg

This post has been edited by thekohser:

[Miltopia]

My opinion of Guy would improve if he went with 4.

[Moulton]

Can we have a betting pool for how long it takes for him to not respond?

[thekohser]

Can we have a betting pool for how long it takes for him to not respond?

$5 on infinity.

[cyofee]

He'll just go politician on us and say absolutely nothing in 500 words.


Except that Kohs is an evil banned user.

[Amarkov]

You forgot option number 5:

"I am ab inito not a liar, and therefore I, prima facie, will nolo contendre your argumentum ad hominem. Sic sempre Kohs!"

Yay random Latin phases!

[guy]

$5 on infinity.

You'll never live to collect it.

[cyofee]

He will if JzG dies before him.

[Jonny Cache]

Greg,

I don't understand who you're trying to convince.

If you're trying to convince Informed, Intelligent, Integrity-Possessing People — well, speaking as a member in wobblie standing of the Informed, Intelligent, Integritied Workers Of The World, I would say you're done.

If you're trying to convince Guy Chapman, or Wikipediots In General (WIGs), I would have to wonder why in the deil you're wasting your life on that.

Jonny (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache:

[Moulton]

It's a game, Jonny. It's all about getting someone to admit the error of their ways, the hypocrisy of their priesthood. It's like betting on the long-shot. Most of the time, you lose your wager. But when you win, it's bigtime.

[GlassBeadGame]

He will if JzG dies before him.

JzG is famous for dying and coming back, like a bad zombie character.

[Emperor]

Greg,

I don't understand who you're trying to convince.

If you're trying to convince Informed, Intelligent, Integrity-Possessing People — well, speaking as a member in wobblie standing of the Informed, Intelligent, Integritied Workers Of The World, I would say you're done.

If you're trying to convince Guy Chapman, or Wikipediots In General (WIGs), I would have to wonder why in the deil you're wasting your life on that.

Jonny (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

Amen. A little angry buzzing on an obscure Wikipedia-approved back channel is not going to bother Guy Chapman or any of the WIGs. I think that they're actually flattered by the attention, that anyone would think this is a game worth winning.

JzG, Jimbo, the Foundation, and WIGs plagiarize, we know they plagiarize, they know we know they plagiarize, and they dare the world to do something about it. Every day JzG remains an administrator is proof.

[Moulton]

It's just another item of evidence that Wikipedia is not a scholastic enterprise. Plagiarism is not an acceptable substitute for original research in academia.

[Jonny Cache]

Amen. A little angry buzzing on an obscure Wikipedia-approved back channel is not going to bother Guy Chapman or any of the WIGs. I think that they're actually flattered by the attention, that anyone would think this is a game worth winning.

JzG, Jimbo, the Foundation, and WIGs plagiarize, we know they plagiarize, they know we know they plagiarize, and they dare the world to do something about it. Every day JzG remains an administrator is proof.

Today they may be flattered by the attention.

One day they will be flattened by the attention.

So our job is purely editorial : Sub["n"/"r"].

Jonny (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

[Moulton]

For those who appreciate great stories about plagiarism, here is one that made it into Newsweek.

This post has been edited by Moulton:

[JukoFF]

JzG, Jimbo, the Foundation, and WIGs plagiarize, we know they plagiarize, they know we know they plagiarize, and they dare the world to do something about it. Every day JzG remains an administrator is proof.

Jimbo and the Foundation - do you mean by proxy of the other plagiarisers on WP, or did I miss some really really damning episode?

[Moulton]

Mimetic misadventures. No foolish mistake is too insignificant to reprise multiple times. Eventually, all the reruns begin to look alike.

[Nya]

It's just another item of evidence that Wikipedia is not a scholastic enterprise. Plagiarism is not an acceptable substitute for original research in academia.

Original research? Plagiarism isn't an acceptable substitute for anything in academia, whether that is one's doctoral dissertation or a daily reflection in a journal. I believe the standard policy at most colleges remains failure of the class for the first offense and expulsion for the second offense.

[Moulton]

It is tempting to hypothesize that the cavalier plagiarists on Wikipedia do not possess college diplomas.

[thekohser]

I appreciate all of the discussion about plagiarism here; but I just want everyone to remember what JzG did with the Arch Coal article was a special breed of plagiarism.

While he didn't copy 100% of someone else's work and call it his own, he did use someone else's work to rearrange words and introduce concepts in different places on the page -- which is pretty much what a wiki is all about.

What is so utterly reprehensible about JzG's plagiarism is that FIFTEEN MONTHS after the fact, he actually went into the article and -- with tools not available to 99% of visitors to that page -- DELETED FROM PUBLIC RECORD the history of that article's authorship. In so doing, he claimed ORIGINATION all to himself. AND, he then lied and lied and lied in another public forum (using phrases like ab initio and such) that he did NOT plagiarize one iota of the deleted author's work.

It's one thing to copy some stuff.

It's another thing to burn the book you copied it from and lie to the world that no such book ever existed and that you are the sole creator of the ideas that book espoused.

It is disgusting.

And that is why Guy Chapman is a joke.

Greg