I am having a disagreement with sonship over his use of other people's "reworded" ministries in this forum without given the originator the credit. I feel that this is poor forum ettiquete.
Taking another person's ministry or spiritual teaching and passing it off as your own, no matter how much "rewording" has been done, is intellectual theft and plagiarism.
Originally posted by divegeester I am having a disagreement with sonship over his use of other people's "reworded" ministries in this forum without given the originator the credit. I feel that this is poor forum ettiquete.
Taking another person's ministry or spiritual teaching and passing it off as your own, no matter how much "rewording" has been done, is intellectual theft and plagiarism.
Correct or incorrect?
That depends.
Plagiarism is a serious accusation. Borrowing ideas and thoughts from another, and paraphrasing to expound on those ideas and thoughts, isn't plagiarism unless one uses direct quotes and copy/pastes from copyrighted material.
Originally posted by divegeester I am having a disagreement with sonship over his use of other people's "reworded" ministries in this forum without given the originator the credit. I feel that this is poor forum ettiquete.
Taking another person's ministry or spiritual teaching and passing it off as your own, no matter how much "rewording" has been done, is intellectual theft and plagiarism.
Correct or incorrect?
It demonstrate a lack of basic training on the part of the perpetrator. He has been doing that for years. Whats new?
Originally posted by divegeester I am having a disagreement with sonship over his use of other people's "reworded" ministries in this forum without given the originator the credit. I feel that this is poor forum ettiquete.
Taking another person's ministry or spiritual teaching and passing it off as your own, no matter how much "rewording" has been done, is intellectual theft and plagiarism.
Correct or incorrect?
You may as well condemn all religions that sprout from the Bible, JW's., Mormons, etc.
Originally posted by whodey You may as well condemn all religions that sprout from the Bible, JW's., Mormons, etc.
I think you may be misunderstanding (possibly deliberately) my point here. I have suspected for a long time that the sermons/teachings/lectures which sonship posts in here contain core topic material from another source; he has admitted as much in one of the current threads. I feel these sources, or indeed, source, should be acknowledged. Do you agree?
Originally posted by josephw Borrowing ideas and thoughts from another, and paraphrasing to expound on those ideas and thoughts, isn't plagiarism unless one uses direct quotes and copy/pastes from copyrighted material.
Originally posted by divegeester Taking another person's ministry or spiritual teaching and passing it off as your own, no matter how much "rewording" has been done, is intellectual theft and plagiarism.
Correct or incorrect?
It depends on the 'rewording' and the 'credit taking'.
Do you credit each and every person that influence your current religious beliefs? Have you ever credited Martin Luther in one of your posts?
If sonship is saying 'I came up with this and its MY ministry' then you may have a case. But if he is merely preaching christianity then he isn't necessarily taking credit at all as it is implicit that the belief system he is promoting is from third parties.
Originally posted by twhitehead It depends on the 'rewording' and the 'credit taking'.
Do you credit each and every person that influence your current religious beliefs? Have you ever credited Martin Luther in one of your posts?
If sonship is saying 'I came up with this and its MY ministry' then you may have a case. But if he is merely preaching christianity then he isn't necessarily ...[text shortened]... ng credit at all as it is implicit that the belief system he is promoting is from third parties.
The thing I don't like about failure to cite sources is that I would like to be able to go to the source and read the quoted material in context. Who and what is the source, what is the main topic, etc.
But all I think I want to do is not read excessive unattributed verbiage. And perhaps let them know of my own personal policy on this.
Plagiarism is a serious accusation. Borrowing ideas and thoughts from another, and paraphrasing to expound on those ideas and thoughts, isn't plagiarism unless one uses direct quotes and copy/pastes from copyrighted material.
At least that's how I understand it.
That is a very narrow view of plagiarism.
You can plagiarise someone's ideas without directly quoting them;
it is intellectual theft.
You think re-writing the Harry Potter books would be legal without permission?
Originally posted by divegeester I think you may be misunderstanding (possibly deliberately) my point here. I have suspected for a long time that the sermons/teachings/lectures which sonship posts in here contain core topic material from another source; he has admitted as much in one of the current threads. I feel these sources, or indeed, source, should be acknowledged. Do you agree?
Originally posted by twhitehead It depends on the 'rewording' and the 'credit taking'.
Do you credit each and every person that influence your current religious beliefs? Have you ever credited Martin Luther in one of your posts?
If sonship is saying 'I came up with this and its MY ministry' then you may have a case. But if he is merely preaching christianity then he isn't necessarily ...[text shortened]... ng credit at all as it is implicit that the belief system he is promoting is from third parties.
I agree that historical Christian biblical doctrine and teaching, such as Calvinism or Lutharism is open to generalised discussion, but when something apparently new is presented, which was initially penned by another contemporary minister, then that minister should be acknowledged as the originator in the ministry. It's about (spiritual) intellectual integrity.
Forum etiquette #2
10 Apr '17 15:32
Back to Top