Saber61 Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 I realize the rule is changed but i am sure it wasn't always that way. Second after looking at some poeples posts, atleast mine are my own. Half you guys plagerize ESPN and TSN along with the print news. Shame on you in the defense of those members who bring news to the rest of us sabres fans... AT LEAST its factual... oh and not to mention they credit it to the source as they should be.... again in laments terms Key Facts from the above paragraph Factual... Credited... Two things that your posts never have. I am done here in this thread... goodbye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 First of all, plagarism only exists in an academic setting, second of all, it's not plagarism when you cite the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_toddkaz Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 for you simpletons i will elaborate. you copy what other people say without a source with stating it is your original thought. Most people here are doing that. Gee's I am used to people a little smarter sorry, I will explain it to you people a little more simple slower and in absolute full detail. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 Do you have proof of someone doing this, or should we just assume it's true because you said it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_toddkaz Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 if you have no objection to plagerism in a social atmosphere then that is your poor morales. But hey I have seen mch worse then that in your country. Potatoe man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_toddkaz Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 if your asking me to go through peoples posts and match them u to what other sports writers say i am sure I have free time somewhere in my day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 if your asking me to go through peoples posts and match them u to what other sports writers say i am sure I have free time somewhere in my day. Figured as much. Without proof your statement has as much credibility as the trade rumors you like to make up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 if you have no objection to plagerism in a social atmosphere then that is your poor morales. But hey I have seen mch worse then that in your country. Potatoe man Well since there is no proof of your accusation, I don't know why I am either bothering to answer you, but: I like to hear a source of something generally, especially if someone says something I have a hard time believing. This doesn't mean I want people to start posting with footnotes and a bibliography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 I realize the rule is changed but i am sure it wasn't always that way. Second after looking at some poeples posts, atleast mine are my own. Half you guys plagerize ESPN and TSN along with the print news. Shame on you Todd, You are right. The rule wasn't ALWAYS that way. It didn't exist until 1934. The shooter couldn't skate with the puck until 1938. There is a reason they call it a "Penalty SHOT". If they wanted to allow rebounds it would be a "Penalty ShotS" (plural, not singular like the word SHOT). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 if your asking me to go through peoples posts and match them u to what other sports writers say i am sure I have free time somewhere in my day. Finally someone making sense. From this point forward, no one shall have the same thought as another person, whether paraphrasing, generalizing or just plain ripping off. I think that sums it up. Could we get this added to the Constitution or the Ten Commandments? :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 8, 2006 Report Share Posted February 8, 2006 I see that you paraphrased what was posted above without proper citation. This is unacceptable. In the future, please use a footnote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.