Show of Hands

“I will paraphrase:

I don’t agree with this, let’s keep in mind that <subject> (enter exact quotes from another website such as Snopes).

This was essentially how it was stated, what made me question the language, is that that person never normally sounds that intelligent.

Now the debate carried on back and forth from there, until I started looking into the last part of their comments and found it.

Basically - i view it as fraudulent behavior because rather than garnering your own opinion, or even paraphrasing, you used direct quote in your argument (at the end of it) without giving credit to the original author.”

Stated that below.

I understand this from your perspective. I think it impressive, that you were able to ferret out the source material. I also think it amusing, that your search was prompted by the perceived lack of intelligence from the person with whom you were debating. So, I suppose what this person (to your point) did, meets the textbook definition of what plagiarism is, and if all one is doing is copying and pasting their comments, it has the distinct 'smell' of fraud and disingenuousness. But Conservative, it’s HERE, on this app of contenders and pretenders. You were skeptical enough, and determined enough to weed out which of those your debate opponent was! So, just chalk this one up in the 'Win' column, even if by default, and hang out with the contenders!
.

Think. You definitely are mesmerizing! 😀👍

Oh boy! :p

Zim ... it’s good that you can finally admit it.

Look at my engagement with Kay to get more context on the question.

Coincidence?... 🙂

I will paraphrase:

I don’t agree with this, let’s keep in mind that <subject> (enter exact quotes from another website such as Snopes).

This was essentially how it was stated, what made me question the language, is that that person never normally sounds that intelligent.

Now the debate carried on back and forth from there, until I started looking into the last part of their comments and found it.

Basically - i view it as fraudulent behavior because rather than garnering your own opinion, or even paraphrasing, you used direct quote in your argument (at the end of it) without giving credit to the original author.

.....

Well, I guess it is plagiarism. But, something like that wouldn't bother me too much on a site like this. Sounds like the other person couldn't or didn't want to put the idea into their own words. Seems sort of lazy not to cite the true source, but no real but deal.

Well that is the point of this - the debate broke into a separate debate, is it plagiarism, or not.

I also find it distasteful because it ruins future credibility.

On top of that, rather than saying “my bad” or “oops.” The response was “Well that worked. You had to do research” or something very similar to that - essentially suggesting that it was designed that way the whole time to have us do research on the topic.......which I didn’t do, I do research on his words.

The topic was was straightforward enough - further research was not needed.

....

Sounds like a lame way to conduct a conversation. I could see why it would bother you.

Originality doesn’t matter when you’re in a very informal setting online and the sole objective is to convince people that your views are correct. At the very worst, it was kind of rude to the original author not to cite his work. Since it was an informal setting, it’s not a huge deal.

What I found MUCH more troublesome in that thread was people completely writing her off because of something so petty.

.

Your opinion (of me) - 🤷‍♂️.

I don’t like it when people pass of “their statements” as their own. They had a choice to put quotes around it, or not. On top of that - their argument was not an argument, it was an ad hominem attack on the person who made the quote....thus allowing for a straw man argument due to the lack of substance around the user.

They clearly googled the person and found a topic to argue against the person (not the question) who made the quote. This wasn’t a discussion of morality or physics or something that required and understanding on a subject (unless you didn’t know what socialism and/or communism was) - this was an attempt by a user to break down why that person was bad (it was a weak argument too - even you can agree with that, right??)

So when you deflect from the question and then you don’t cite or put quotes around it, yeah - you lose all credibility in my eyes.

...

Also for the record, I was trying to leave things as ambiguous as possible so as to not have the details spill into here, that sadly didn’t work

So using an ad hominem as an excuse to dismiss someone’s arguments, but it’s okay for you to use an ad hominem as an excuse to write someone off and dismiss all their future arguments? How does that make any sense?

*So using an ad hominem as an excuse to dismiss someone’s arguments is wrong,

I see you constantly talking trash, why do you hate people so much?

Where is this coming from all of a sudden? Boo hoo, you got called out for poor online etiquette. Not like you didn’t do the exact same thing to smart1. You criticize others, but can’t take criticism yourself?

That was the point, did you enjoy an ad hominem in place of answering the question. You asked how it works, I was showing you.

No I would have had a much wittier insult if I was being serious.

You asked a question, I provided an ad hominem in place of answering the question, and you reacted exactly like I did. Just shows, we are all very similar creatures even when we are trying to perform one-upmanship.

✌️

I wrote the person off because I believed they were just being an ass just to do it.......similar to your efforts here.

You couple that with plagiarism (can’t come up with your own actual opinion on the matter) - you present yourself as a fraud, so yeah I have a problem with that.

Either way, I can say it was wrong of me to write them off.....but let’s just say this, I will be suspicious if their opinion is really just the opinions of Snopes moving forward......I didn’t cause this dilemma, I’m just reacting to it.

....

Okay, smart1 was in the wrong for using an ad hominem to write off everything Ayn Rand said, and you were in the wrong for using an ad hominem to write off everything smart1 says. There, happy now?

There’s really no getting out of this. If you get to decide that someone isn’t worth listening to because they’ve “lost all credibility,” then other people also get to decide that Ayn Rand isn’t worth listening to because she’s lost all credibility. If you’re going to accuse someone of something, maybe don’t do the exact same thing to them.

.

“You couple that with plagiarism (can’t come up with your own actual opinion on the matter) - you present yourself as a fraud, so yeah I have a problem with that.”

That’s not how opinions work. You’re not supposed to be as contrarian as possible on everything and adopt an opinion that no one else has. You’re supposed to believe whatever you find most compelling. That means you might agree with people sometimes, so your opinion might not be “original.” There is no “someone else’s opinion,” because opinions can be shared among numerous different people. This idea that you need to “come up with your own opinion” is just absurd. There’s a lot of conservatives in the world, so should you find a new ideology because conservatism is already taken?

If I agree with what someone has to say, it’s perfectly reasonable to just quote that person verbatim. We don’t need to be “original” in an informal debate; we only need to be compelling.

.

The only thing I aimed to gain here was if others believed as myself. I was trying to leave this very vague, but also included names to ensure that people didn’t think I was trash talking. Writing someone’s opinions (if you can call it that) off is perhaps a knee jerk reaction to what I found offensive.....I will always be suspicious of his opinions moving forward, which is the only travesty from this...

Also - no, I was never happy or unhappy with the outcome of this, I was just curious if others had the same pulse on this as I did, you unfortunately made this much more complicated than it needed to be, but it is what it is, and we can end it here.

😄

I still see no reason why you would be suspicious of someone’s opinions just because they agreed with another person on something, but okay.

You two want to take your fight to a different thread?? My notifications are blowing up! Thanks. 😊

I’m done - so no problem from me! :)

Came*. Not cake....

What was said during that conversation absolutely fits the definition of plagiarism