January 28, 2009 at 7:38 am
Domagoj Orec (1/28/2009)
Ok, maybe not, but it is kinda weird.
Nah. Some people join to post on the forums (and hence gain points), many join just to read (and maybe submit) articles.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
January 28, 2009 at 7:47 am
I hope the individual who did this, realizes what they did was wrong and learns from this experience. I would recommend that the individual get things right by apologizing to Steve for plagiarizing part of the article and if possible to the original author. After that, it is time for the individual to move on. There is not one individual who can say that he has never done anything wrong. The key is, when you do something wrong, make it right and move on.
Proverbs 28:13 He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.
January 28, 2009 at 9:02 am
The other day I was doing a search on Testing Methods. I was floored when an article I was reading linked to an item on my own web site. No attribution. There was no attempt to hide it was from my site.
Strange thing is it is one of the humor items but this author took it seriously. The list was one that circulated around the net for years and never had an attribution.
Our current Vice President knows quite a bit about this subject, but I'm sure that he is over all that by now. :Whistling:
ATBCharles Kincaid
January 28, 2009 at 9:02 am
I have sent an email to the author, no word back from him. I'm leaving his name up there, and hopefully that will deter him from further transgressions.
A great point in information being repeated. It happens, and it's a problem, but I'm not sure what you do about it. BOL is wrong in places, or even contradictory, so if someone uses that as a source, do they not know what they are talking about? Perhaps, but we also have to remember that our understanding changes, and our views change. I definitely view information from 5 years ago differently from today because we've learned things.
We republish articles here, but we try to limit it to the last 1-2 years, specifically because advice that is older, might not be appropriate anymore.
January 28, 2009 at 9:09 am
It can be a very convoluted path back to the original source on the web. Computer technology makes the act of taking someone else's work trivial, so it removes the last barrier of having to retype it to be able to take credit for it.
Did you check with the authors to ask them for the source of the work? I'm not making any accusations, but it is not impossible that the first guy posting on SSC got it from the other guy if he published it somewhere else. Or that they both got it from some third party.
I think what is a unusual about this is republishing the article of the original web site where it is more likely that a reader or the original author would notice it. Kind of like me getting an electronic copy of a popular novel, and resubmitting it to the original publisher as my own work. Hum, wonder if that would work if I took an older novel that was in the public domain, changed the name of the book and characters...:Whistling:
January 28, 2009 at 9:15 am
Charles Kincaid (1/28/2009)
The other day I was doing a search on Testing Methods. I was floored when an article I was reading linked to an item on my own web site. No attribution. There was no attempt to hide it was from my site.Strange thing is it is one of the humor items but this author took it seriously. The list was one that circulated around the net for years and never had an attribution.
Our current Vice President knows quite a bit about this subject, but I'm sure that he is over all that by now. :Whistling:
If they just had a link to your article, and not the article itself, don't that make the source obvious?
January 28, 2009 at 9:21 am
R L Reid (1/28/2009)
. . . If I Google on a subject I know a great deal about, I will often find that 90% of the articles are largely identical - and that they are significantly wrong! . Even if reworded and reorganized, it's obvious that they all tie back to the same original.Because the incorrect information gets repeated so often, it appears to carry weight. . . .
Years ago, I voiced concern over the quality of information on the web - after all, anyone can anonymously post mis-information, and it will get used and reused. People who are well-informed on a subject can spot the mis-information, but what about young students?
It's one reason why I like SQLServerCentral so much - I know I can trust it - and the discussion forums are quick to point out faulty information.
In terms of general knowledge on the web, I am really impressed with Wikipedia. The articles on topics I do know are very accurate and and all articles are full of references. Now, when I "google", I start with the Wikipedia article.
January 28, 2009 at 9:46 am
Hi Steve;
Earlier in this discussion thread, someone posted a link to software that does comparisons.
It is standard practice for online learning courses (for advanced degrees, continuing education, etc.) to also use software that automatically checks written work for plagiarism. Often, the results are presented as a "similarity score", and will include references to the specific bits that the software determines are a match. It wouldn't suprise me if there was also software that works with programming code snippets.
It seems it would be a good idea for an online publishing site like SqlServerCentral.com to employ software like this in the editorial workflow.
TroyK
January 28, 2009 at 9:56 am
I attended the AYSO Section 4 Conference in Wichita, KS last week. I learned something interesting during my Referee Administrator course and thought I'd share just a very short snippet of this info.
I'd tell you where to go to see the details, but unfortunately the url in Referee Administrator Reference Guide does not work.
Any way, the bottom line is this:
68% of both boys and girls surveyed admitted to cheating on tests in school.
56% of the boys and 45% of the girls felt that cheating is required to succeed in the "real world".
This was a survey of 4,200 high school athletes by the Josephson Institute of Ethics. From my guide, it appears that this survey was done in 2004.
That does that say about us as parents? We learn more by observation then anything else if you notice. Try telling a new teenage driver that they need to obey the speed limit. The first response you may get, "You don't, why should I?"
We, as professionals need to set the standards of conduct, and then live them. We can't condemn others for things we ourselves may be doing.
January 28, 2009 at 10:51 am
R L Reid (1/28/2009)
When the folks doing the copying don't know the material well enough, the quality of what's copied can't be assured. Oddly this doesn't seem to be much of a problem in the Sybase world, but in the SQL Server world there's a lot more urban legend.In my avocation as a musicologist, I see this to a frightening degree. If I Google on a subject I know a great deal about, I will often find that 90% of the articles are largely identical - and that they are significantly wrong! . Even if reworded and reorganized, it's obvious that they all tie back to the same original.
Because the incorrect information gets repeated so often, it appears to carry weight. This also ossifies dated information. For example, most of the performance techniques of the past 20 years are turned on their heads on modern hardware that can run 64 threads at once, with cheap self-balancing JBODs (e.g. using ZFS file systems).
So plagiarism isn't just "wrong" for ethical reasons. It also means the information is being edited by someone who doesn't know the subject, and so incorrect or outdated information is constantly being brought fresh into the "data cache".
Oh my... I wrote an article about two weeks ago on "The 'SQL Clone' Epidemic" covering this very same topic... and it's not just limited to the WEB, either! There are a very large number of very well know author's that I'd like to introduce to high velocity pork chops for publishing some of the worst code and methods possible that I've seen people post on this very site. The article even contains samples I've copied from books and author web sites...
And, heh... no... I didn't give the authors credit for those... I'm allowing them some severe anonymity (even "warping" the code so it's untraceable) so I don't get my butt sued into oblivion.
I still haven't decided whether to actually submit it as an SSC article or not... it IS very controversial and it'll probably generate about a million comments on the discussion page. Heh... futue SQL book sales may plummet! 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 28, 2009 at 10:52 am
Lynn Pettis (1/28/2009)
68% of both boys and girls surveyed admitted to cheating on tests in school.56% of the boys and 45% of the girls felt that cheating is required to succeed in the "real world".
This was a survey of 4,200 high school athletes by the Josephson Institute of Ethics.
Interesting. I want to know more. Those numbers are dismayingly high. Are high school athletes, who have to make sure they stay eligible, more tempted to cheat? Does the mentality "Win at any cost" play into this?
How do students in non-competitve fields answer these questions?
(I realize, you don't have these answers. I'm going to check out that Institute.)
January 28, 2009 at 10:59 am
Carla Wilson (1/28/2009)
Lynn Pettis (1/28/2009)
68% of both boys and girls surveyed admitted to cheating on tests in school.56% of the boys and 45% of the girls felt that cheating is required to succeed in the "real world".
This was a survey of 4,200 high school athletes by the Josephson Institute of Ethics.
Interesting. I want to know more. Those numbers are dismayingly high. Are high school athletes, who have to make sure they stay eligible, more tempted to cheat? Does the mentality "Win at any cost" play into this?
How do students in non-competitve fields answer these questions?
(I realize, you don't have these answers. I'm going to check out that Institute.)
As a father of three (one graduates this year, the other is a freshman in high school, and the other is still in elementary), I'd be interested in what else you find out. Keep us all posted.
January 28, 2009 at 10:59 am
Are they high? Are they higher than in the past? Saw plenty of cheating 20+ years ago when I was in school.
January 28, 2009 at 11:00 am
The way that publik skrewel (in the US anyway) teaches "suppository writing" leads many, many people astray. Proper paraphrasing, citation and fair use are NOT taught these days. It seems to be more important that kids "produce something" and they're shown how easy copy&paste from Wikipedia can be. I'm not surprised that it's becoming more and more rampant.
January 28, 2009 at 11:00 am
cs_troyk (1/28/2009)
It seems it would be a good idea for an online publishing site like SqlServerCentral.com to employ software like this in the editorial workflow.
I'll Have to check them out. I wonder if I have to let them hold a copy of the article, is it there, do I have software on my side, etc. It's definitely an interesting problem.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 47 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply