1 edit
Originally posted by DrKFpicky picky picky.
Twice in two days recently:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=126969&page=4#post_2380632
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=126903&page=1
and he's been called on it before then, too.
do you know, i recently posted a new thread with a title and link only.
where's my harangue? 😠 how come he gets one and i don't? 😠
Originally posted by trev33OOOOHHHH! SMACKdown! WHAT NOW, TREV?!? WHAT NOW!?!?
rephrasing the question... have you ever posted in a thread were you haven't provided a link to a news story and/or a wiki page? 😏
Thread 127730
2 edits
Originally posted by zeeblebotCome now, you can't demand details then call me picky when I supply them!
picky picky picky.
do you know, i recently posted a new thread with a title and link only.
where's my harangue? 😠 how come he gets one and i don't? 😠
No haranguing for you: spambot is as spambot does, link-wise, and I may as well demand the wind stop blowing as ask you for thoughts of your own. But you-know-who's got to learn that he can't pass off thinking people's work as his own.
Originally posted by DrKFgiven that the wording is not his, and everyone caught it, and it's not been the first time, by what knowledge do you claim that the omissions were intentional and not mistakes?
Come now, you can't demand details then call me picky when I supply them!
No haranguing for you: spambot is as spambot does, link-wise, and I may as well demand the wind stop blowing as ask you for thoughts of your own. But you-know-who's got to learn that he can't pass off thinking people's work as his own.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 23315
Originally posted by zeeblebothhmmm and you give me a thread with 4 posts, 2 of them yours. interesting. what do you think of this?
OOOOHHHH! SMACKdown! WHAT NOW, TREV?!? WHAT NOW!?!?
Thread 127730
Originally posted by FMFIn other words you're going to avoid the debate by concentrating on your little personal attacks instead, very well, I understand you can't help being a troll.
No. It was my way of avoiding mention of your plastic debating pants. But now you have forced my hand, and I have. My word you're a tough little debater.
Originally posted by zeeblebotIn one of the examples, he didn't even acknowledge what he had done.
given that the wording is not his, and everyone caught it, and it's not been the first time, by what knowledge do you claim that the omissions were intentional and not mistakes?
I don't really need to prove that he repeatedly and intentionally plagiarises; for me, it's enough that he does it repeatedly. He should pick up his game.
Repeatedly cut and pasting screeds of other people's work (with references) is lazy-assed stuff - it seems to me that those who do so on a regular basis do so in lieu of thoughts of their own or the ability to put them in to coherent sentences. Cut and pasting other people's work without references is either equally lazy and sloppy to boot, or equally lazy and duplicitous. Maybe in a way it would be better if it were intentional; if it is not, there's not even that spark of low cunning as motivation, just stupidity.
Originally posted by DrKFand it's something DrKF would never do.
In one of the examples, he didn't even acknowledge what he had done.
I don't really need to prove that he repeatedly and intentionally plagiarises; for me, it's enough that he does it repeatedly. He should pick up his game.
Repeatedly cut and pasting screeds of other people's work (with references) is lazy-assed stuff - it seems to me that t ...[text shortened]... l; if it is not, there's not even that spark of low cunning as motivation, just stupidity.
Originally posted by DrKFYou are evidently just another crank of the same ilk as FMF. Have a look at this.
He was judged - by a team of psychiatrists infinitly better placed to pass comment on anyone's mental health and relative risk - to no longer be a danger to society at the time of his release. Probation services have now found that he has not, in the fullness of time since his release, readjusted as much as was hoped. He has therefore been returned to prison. ...[text shortened]... it is difficult in this country to have anything like a sensible debate on penal policy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7383903/James-Bulger-killer-Jon-Venables-accused-of-serious-sex-offence.html
Originally posted by FMFLooks as though you are just a doppelganger of DrKf. FMF with a fake doctorate?
He was judged - by a team of psychiatrists infinitly better placed to pass comment on anyone's mental health and relative risk - to no longer be a danger to society at the time of his release. Probation services have now found that he has not, in the fullness of time since his release, readjusted as much as was hoped. He has therefore been returned to prison.
...[text shortened]... it is difficult in this country to have anything like a sensible debate on penal policy.