Exposed!

[BAMF]

I hadn't seen the genuine contrition posts until just now. Unfortunately (or maybe I should say fortunately), with a busy holiday schedule, I have no time to comment, other than to make a brief request: Victor, now that you've made some apologies and comments about wanting to redeem yourself, it might be a good time to think about taking some time away from dealing with this issue publicly. Ask yourself if it is understandable that people would continue to be angry with you and wary of anything that you might have to say. There are a lot of people who are going to need a lot of time before they begin to even think about trusting you again. Some of them never will. Any little lie or fuck up that you make is going to be noticed and criticized, and rightfully so. I think you have to focus solely on you and what is your fault, and you have to stop attacking people who you think are attacking you. No one owes you generosity, and being critical of anyone right now other than yourself is just not cool.

You're in a shitty position, but being aggressive, or pushing for a quick resolution, isn't going to help.

J

Thank you for the genuine post, Jonathan. That is EXCELLENT advice.

[gary williams]

"C'mon, after all, everyone knows that there's three big warning signs when dating a man, if discovered, a woman should run the other way...

- Axe murderer

- Plagiarist

- Living with parents after 21

Bob"

MOM! THEY ARE MAKING FUN OF ME AGAIN!!!!

(plagiarizing an old tv show) ........(Me) - "There it was! Painted on my high school locker! The words....."MAMA'S BOY!!!"

(A friend) - "Did you do anything about it?"

(Me) - "No, but my Mama sure did!!!"

Ahem....has anyone stopped and realized just how lovely Barbara is!

Marry me Barbara! And I promise you many a happy night in a very, very padded cell!

Prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

(Shit! I just plagiarized Kat!!)

p.s. - I can't plagiarize cuz I can't figure out the quote thingy!

p.p.s - Vic, it's all about principles and morals. Morals based on principles, er somesuch. You were a stone wall of reason but you had no foundation. All walls fall without foundation. Try reading Rand.

pp.p.p.ppppp.ssss - Firecracker, your foundation is solid as a diamond. You know I know. Hang in there. You know the truth. You live it everyday. I think about you every day but just kinda like a sister now...........Hey! Let's move to Arkansas cuz I hear sisters are hot there! Sorry I am an ass and I have just been couped up fer a spell.....Take care sweetie!

Now back to Barbara..........Let me ravage you like only a pigmy love monkey can!!! Size does not matter right? Riiiiiiiiiight?!?!?!?!?!?

Now, if anyone can plagiarize me, I have one thing to say..........Damn yer good!!!!

Adios!

gw

[Barbara Branden]

Marry me Barbara!

Sorry, Gary, but you're much too solemn for me. And a bit old.

Barbara

[gary williams]

Oh! My! God!

After 44 years, 6 months and yada, yada, yada minutes......(damn math)

BARBARA BRANDEN SPOKE TO ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My God there are not enough exclaimation points in the alphabet for this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are not enough stars for me to capture and put into a single engagement ring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH PADDING IN MY CELL TO KEEP ME FROM DOING VILE THINGS TO....ER, MY PADDING!

Ladys and Genteelmen.....The Jackass has scored!

*****Wait just a damn minute......OLD? Me?*****

Honey I take Geritol.....and let me tell ya something........I am really..............

Oh my God Barbara just talked to me!!!!!!!!!!

Barbara! I love ya!

I respect ya!

I want to see you nekkid!

I mean that from the bottom of my heart! (Especially the nekkid part!)

Damn! Barbara Branden just talked to me!

I am going to have a woody for a month!

Is that too much information?

Oh well.

Now back to our original program.

gw

[Greybird]

[...] Victor has mentioned Steve Reed's use of "schadenfreude." As someone who has ridiculed Victor's poor behavior, I wanted to say that I don't think that people here were taking pleasure in Victor's misfortunes, but were expressing disapproval of his misdeeds.

I didn't use Schadenfreude in regard to Victor's plagiarism, but (in this post) in regard to how some parties were dumping on Angie and Victor, their styles of expression, and their prospects, in the "Love in Bloom" thread.

If Victor extended the meaning, that's a misattribution. I'm going to say forthrightly that, as far as I'm concerned, this is an innocent one. If he did so out of more general Angst (another German noun {rueful smile}), I really don't blame him. Misbehavior, incivility, and bad faith have been present on all sides in this sorry mess.

I don't think it's at all accurate to say that Victor has been the victim of a lynching, as Steve said before pretending to unsay it in the same post.

In this post. I didn't "pretend to unsay" it, I did unsay it. The concept of "lynching" comes readily to mind and to typing hands — perhaps too readily. I wanted to note that, after having typed it, but went on to say that the concept didn't apply here. Read the post for yourself.

If Victor is now suffering misfortunes, I'm not deriving pleasure from discovering it. My hope is that he will sincerely make amends, and then go on to live a happy life.

I'm glad you said this, I'll strongly endorse it, and I hope that everyone else here would do so.

[bmacwilliam]

Of more importance: Victor is giving as a reason for his massive plagiary here his anger at the reception when he posted about having become attracted to Angie.

___

Cool! That would make it mostly my fault then!

Bob

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Misbehavior, incivility, and bad faith have been present on all sides in this sorry mess.

What was that about Schadenfreude?

Michael

[Jonathan]

...And are we really supposed to admire him for offering to tell Michael, after heaps of bodies have been discovered, where he buried the rest of the bodies?

Barbara

I see it as a chance to gauge how serious Victor is about making amends. Additional "bodies" have already been discovered by some of us, but not reported publicly, so the level of Victor's thoroughness in compiling what should be a very comprehensive list of his plagiarized posts (indicating which sections were plagiarized, and clearly citing the sources from which they were plagiarized) will be one means of measuring his sincerity, or lack thereof.

Some of this...

I have sent an email to MSK (site owner of Objectivist Living) offering my assistance to weed out the plagiarized passages---and I have received no word. I wish to state--here and now and on record, so to speak---that this offer still stands. There is only so much I can do in "taking action"---if the people involved don't meet me half way.

...from here, is not a good sign. There's no need to expect, demand, or even request that MSK or Kat "meet him halfway." If they choose to ignore him, that's their right. He can post a list of his plagiarisms at the Meetup site, or he can start a blog at any of the free blog spots.

The idea of making amends is to perform the task of correcting one's misdeeds because it is one of the right things to do if you are genuinely interested in redemption. Pointing out where all of the "bodies are buried" is important whether or not anyone accepts your efforts, whether or not they are willing to forgive you, and even whether or not they tell you to fuck off.

J

Edited July 4, 2007 by Jonathan

[Jonathan]

I don't think it's at all accurate to say that Victor has been the victim of a lynching, as Steve said before pretending to unsay it in the same post.

In this post. I didn't "pretend to unsay" it, I did unsay it. The concept of "lynching" comes readily to mind and to typing hands — perhaps too readily. I wanted to note that, after having typed it, but went on to say that the concept didn't apply here. Read the post for yourself.

Well, I think you're playing games here, Steve. You want to scold people for taking jabs at Victor (even though they're in the right, and have been justifiably reacting to his misbehavior), but, at the same time, you want to take unfair jabs at them (apparently due to your struggling with a strong urge to place loyalty to a friend over justice), while cloaking your jabs in a childish technicality of unjabbing your jabs.

While writing, and before you have posted your message, to actually unsay something would be to remove it from the post. If you truly believe that an insulting concept doesn't apply to the situation -- to the people at whom you're aiming it -- you don't try to still get the jab in and then pretend to have pulled the jab.

Well, that is unless you want your childish technicality to become the means by which we all converse with you, about you, and about Victor and anyone else you feel close to.

You're a self-important, fucktard priss.

I withdraw the above comment.

Abracadabra...UNSAY! Poof.

Is that the type of "dignified" discussion that you're preaching?

If Victor is now suffering misfortunes, I'm not deriving pleasure from discovering it. My hope is that he will sincerely make amends, and then go on to live a happy life.

I'm glad you said this, I'll strongly endorse it, and I hope that everyone else here would do so.

I think most people here do endorse it. I think that everyone would like to see him redeem himself, even though many may not think that it is likely that he will do so.

J

Edited July 4, 2007 by Jonathan

[BAMF]

PEEP THIS

And so it starts.

[william.scherk]

...And are we really supposed to admire him for offering to tell Michael, after heaps of bodies have been discovered, where he buried the rest of the bodies?

Additional "bodies" have already been discovered [ . . . ]

I have sent an email to MSK (site owner of Objectivist Living) offering my assistance to weed out the plagiarized passages [i won't help weed] if the people involved don't meet me half way.

...from here[ . . . ] There's no need to expect, demand, or even request that MSK or Kat "meet him halfway."

Ditto. Or,

"Bodies"? "Meet you halfway and I will tell you about the other bodies"? "I remember she had red hair. Meet me halfway and I will tell you where I buried her. It was somewhere near Vegas, Gil, but I ain't tellin' till you meet me halfway. Your call"?

WTF?

One could argue both sides. 1. When the psychotic killer offers to meet CSI 'halfway,' halfway it is, baby, 'cause this is forensics, and it is in our interest to meet you anywhere you want, sugar, so we can collect hari samples and send your ass to the gas chamber. Or, 2. no way, baby. You shat your bed. Nobody but nobody gonna wash them sheets but you, sugar.

Both arguments are plausible, if irrelevant.

Another angle is 'whatever evidence do we have that our own forensic techniques will be surpassed by meeting the offender "halfway"'? I would say, zero evidence, considering the incompetence and cupidity of the actor.

Another question. Cui Bono? Who benefits? The offender or the nice folks who go to the trouble of driving off into the desert outside Vegas? I say, the offender. And unless standard O-on-one-leg ethics require we invite the psychotic killer to break bread with us and 'help' us find his victims, when we are all his victims, it is suggested on authority of the Princess of Reason Herself, that the looter be smashed up in a train tunnel as soon as possible.

The bestest question: "Halfway to exactly where, sugar?" Hell? Halfway to the Passionate Heights of Passionate Whatever, maybe?

Another.

What if this is a 'see me, hear me, feel me, touch me," moment from a very fine manipulator? -- does I Plagerist, I Karikatur expect applause instead of jail time? If so, the clang! you hear is cognitive dissonance.

Clang!

Seriously, has the Bickster yet shown evidence of integrity? Why should we imagine a compulsive psycho-killer is going to play by any 'little' game, when he has shown the big game's rules mean shit? Do we really want to eat brains with Lector/Victor? it doesn't generally work out nicely for everyone at the table.

***************************

What a terrible time to be an Objectivist, when the surgical ethics of Rand are no help at all . . . perhaps the one-eyed monks of ARI can issue an edict/crappy editorial in which Lector can be tied to Iran, and then we can just bomb the shit out of him and them and America Will Be Great Again.

***************************

And why the hell should I pretend I don't feel pleasure in the suffering of others in some circumstances? Good lawd, I am not talking about watching witches swing on Hangman's Hill, I am talking about watching somebody slip on his own crap and fall on his ass, causing painful bruises and general severe embarrassment. Does feeling pleasure witnessing the pratfall make me a bad person? If so, I am pleased to be bad. If that is Schadenfreude, then shadenfriggingfreude, baby.

Let us face psychological facts. We humans tend to enjoy that people be punished in measure to their offences. It is deeply emotionally satisfying to sense justice. Even frigging monkeys feel it, feel injustice, feel a primal surgelof monkey joy when banana-thief slips up on a peel. The joy of justice.

(It is not at all satisfying to drive off into the desert to meet a manipulative killer maniac [unless, like me, you are a psychological observer of all things Objectivish, in which case your notes will be valuable if the psycho- killer is The Real Thing and you can sell the treatment to Hollywood])

The longer this waking dream in which El Victor esta Muy Importante continues, the more I suspect that some people exist in another ethical universe apart from me, an infinity of a membrane away. Where one wants to see the real witches swing, but one says, "no I don't" -- without any clang! at all . . .

Meet you halfway, Victor, you bet. I am already there, napping. Wake me up when ya get here. Hoping you will forge an autograph to my copy of your newly-purloined books, "How to Make Friends and Influence People, Not," and "I Call it Addiction, You Call it Compulsion. Whatever, I Get Attention and Bring Acclaim to Objectivism, Not."

Edited July 5, 2007 by william.scherk

[James Heaps-Nelson]

Victor still doesn't get it. Outside the 12-step cover, you can still see the passive-aggressive petulance shining through. Loosely quoting Nathaniel Branden, there are some people whose needs weren't met when they were 5 years old and until then they aren't moving on to six.

Jim

[Greybird]

Misbehavior, incivility, and bad faith have been present on all sides in this sorry mess.

What was that about Schadenfreude?

I stand by what I said. Including how this sorry mess (to leave nothing to implication, that's Victor's plagiarism and the reaction to it) has affected me. It's brought out less than my own best in keeping an even temper as a kibitzer.

By the way, I did say that all these factors "have been present." That notes their existence, not their magnitude or proportion on each (or any) side.

I don't see what this has to do at all with Schadenfreude, especially with my having noted above that I brought that up in regard to Victor-and-Angie, not plagiarism.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I don't see what this has to do at all with Schadenfreude, especially with my having noted above that I brought that up in regard to Victor-and-Angie, not plagiarism.

Steve,

To be blunt, I think you are enjoying yourself.

Michael

[Greybird]

While writing, and before you have posted your message, to actually unsay something would be to remove it from the post. If you truly believe that an insulting concept doesn't apply to the situation - to the people at whom you're aiming it - you don't try to still get the jab in and then pretend to have pulled the jab. [...]

Good frigging Christ, this is getting tiring.

I'll say it to you, now: I meant exactly what I said. The "lynch" locution (which was meant to be descriptive, not insulting as such, though I can't control your reaction) came to mind first. I said I withdrew it. I substituted what I saw as a more accurate expression: stabbing Victor's (intellectual) corpse.

I wanted to note both alternatives because I was making a point about how more than one metaphor can come readily to mind, in sorry situations such as this. I was not going to hide the fact of the path of my mental processes in that respect. I don't judge them to be the best, with emotions running this high. You can, and will, judge them as you please.

No, this is not involving a lynch mob. It's too easy to slip into such an appraisal. I decided something else better fit what I intended. I thought all three of these things should be noted. If my lack of felicity of expression in this regard doesn't satisfy you, that's your problem.

Edited July 5, 2007 by Greybird

[Greybird]

To be blunt, I think you are enjoying yourself.

In regard to what? Would you care to give specifics to such a personal charge?

(I guess I'm going to have to ask that you do so in public, Michael, as it's too late now to take this to PMs, where it really belongs.)

For the record, I "enjoy" none of this. Victor caused grievous injury, both personal and intellectual. And some of the responses to his actions have been neither appropriate, nor productive, nor even fair. I'm dismayed that any of this has happened, on any and all sides.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

In regard to what? Would you care to give specifics to such a personal charge?

Steve,

I think you are getting a kick out of all the problems everybody is facing with this (Pross exempted) and having a ball sitting back and pointing fingers.

You are entitled to your public opinions. I am entitled to mine. Enjoy yourself and be my guest. It's a free show at your end.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

In regard to what? Would you care to give specifics to such a personal charge?

Steve,

I think you are getting a kick out of all the problems everybody is facing with this (Pross exempted) and having a ball sitting back and pointing fingers.

You are entitled to your public opinions. I am entitled to mine. Enjoy yourself and be my guest. It's a free show at your end.

Michael

I think Steve is just trying to stick up for his friends.

--Brant

[Dragonfly]

Was Victor treated unfairly on OL with regard to his plagiarism? I don't think so, and if someone claims that he was, I'd like to see evidence for that.

[Jonathan]

While writing, and before you have posted your message, to actually unsay something would be to remove it from the post. If you truly believe that an insulting concept doesn't apply to the situation - to the people at whom you're aiming it - you don't try to still get the jab in and then pretend to have pulled the jab. [...]

Good frigging Christ, this is getting tiring.

I'll say it to you, now: I meant exactly what I said. The "lynch" locution (which was meant to be descriptive, not insulting as such, though I can't control your reaction) came to mind first. I said I withdrew it. I substituted what I saw as a more accurate expression: stabbing Victor's (intellectual) corpse.

I wanted to note both alternatives because I was making a point about how more than one metaphor can come readily to mind, in sorry situations such as this. I was not going to hide the fact of the path of my mental processes in that respect. I don't judge them to be the best, with emotions running this high. You can, and will, judge them as you please.

No, this is not involving a lynch mob. It's too easy to slip into such an appraisal. I decided something else better fit what I intended. I thought all three of these things should be noted. If my lack of felicity of expression in this regard doesn't satisfy you, that's your problem.

Steve,

About the "stabbing of a corpse" issue:

First of all, I think that you were partly right that people were saying some of what they were saying to vent their anger, though I don't agree with you that their doing so was "superfluous." People are going to react to misbehavior, just as you've reacted to their behavior. Given the magnitude of Victor's misdeeds, can you understand that it was a little unrealistic of you to expect people to stop reacting passionately to the issue after only a couple of days, especially considering the fact that Victor was still in almost purely attack mode at the time? I mean, it's actually been a very short period of time now since the shit initially hit the fan, and I get the feeling that everyone, including Victor, is already less angry than you appear to be: you seem to be more pissed off at how people have reacted to Victor's misdeeds than they've been pissed off at Victor.

Secondly, the "stabbing of a corpse" metaphor isn't a good one. Execution puts an end to the matter, since the transgressor can no longer speak or take actions -- he can't move on to new victims, try to continue fooling the old ones, or earnestly try to redeem himself. You seem to believe that Victor's banishment from OL puts an end to the issue: that he's been convicted, received his sentence, and that should be the end of it as far as OL members are concerned. It's as if you think we inhabit OL as a jurisdiction and that we are not to stray beyond its boundaries or concern ourselves with things that might happen in other jurisdictions. Some here have been motivated by their desire to make it very unlikely that this type of thing will ever happen again -- anywhere.

Personally, I've been motivated by a few things, none of which I consider to be vices which deserve your scolding. I've wanted Victor to understand that people are right to be angry and disappointed with him. I wanted to see how he reacted to expressions of anger or disappointment. I wanted him to experience the consequences of his actions, and to recognize that he's not the victim here. I want to see if tries to continue to be deceptive or to be truly repentant. I don't want the deceptions to continue - both for Victor's sake and for the sake of those who would be the victims of further deceptions.

J

[Barbara Branden]

Steve, in my experience the people on OL are predominantly very decent. I have no doubt that Victor would be treated with kindness and compassion if he would stop posturing as a hero, stop lying about his plagiarisms (now he states there were fewer than 15 of them!), stop blaming other people for his actions, stop angling for attention like a petulant child, stop denouncing Internet forums as the cause of his downfall, stop demanding credit for nothing at all, stop pretending penitence while expressing rage -- and begin facing the enormity of what he's done, for which he alone is responsible. How Victor is treated on OL, is up to Victor. It always has been.

Barbara

[BAMF]

*sings and dances*

"I'm on a campaign for pain, and when I get elected, I'll wipe the white off your house, the smile off your face!"

:getlost:

[Greybird]

Well, I'm going to try to put all this into one reply. That's about all I can endure. I'll spare you the excess quoting apparatus, as it's all from this thread.

* * *

Brant Gaede:

> I think Steve is just trying to stick up for his friends.

No, that's not it. Certainly not the "just," although I'd say that it's more seemly to admit to such a friendship existing, to whatever degree (far from the best, in my case, especially recently).

And to avoid rewriting the past, with the broadly hinted implication from many sides: Pross a wanton plagiarist? Why, I never believed what he posted for a second! I never thought his discussion was worthwhile! I never responded positively to him, because I always saw him for what he was! ... Oceania is at war with Eastasia, therefore Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia!

I've been trying to stick up for reasonable and proportionate responses. Going on a crusade to dig up every buried plagiarized body is disproportionate, in terms of what it has to do with current discussion, and especially after the perpetrator has been barred from adding to that discussion.

That's the root of the matter: OL is in turmoil about all this primarily because Michael is letting it be that way. To me, a responsible approach would have followed a wholly appropriate announcement of Victor having been banned (which MSK did do) with a request that past instances be left rotting, unnoticed, and ultimately abandoned.

Instead, all such items are being resurrected and needlessly apologized for, as if a site owner is somehow morally responsible for all misbehavior of those who post there, which he most emphatically is not.

* * *

Dragonfly:

> Was Victor treated unfairly on OL with regard to his plagiarism? I don't

> think so, and if someone claims that he was, I'd like to see evidence for that.

The exhumation of the past that's noted above isn't being unfair to him, just ultimately pointless, and needlessly poisoning of the discussion climate ... what's left of it.

Yet I'd say that three elements being added to every post of his - the "Banned" button, the "Banned for plagiary"[*] legend, and the added signature in large type, urging more such digging and reporting - are overkill, and at least two too many.

Especially this last. Putting that statement after every post of his suggests that he is an outright liar, or is to be assumed to be one, on everything he's ever said here. Including statements about his professional work and emotional life. Where a minimal courtesy requires that one initially operate as if he isn't misrepresenting the core of his identity. That isn't rationality, it's forcing thousands of posts to bear a scarlet "A," and not even a Pross deserves that.

[* Michael's use of this non-standard noun drives me crazy. Even though it's an acceptable usage, the normal U.S. usage is "plagiarism." That is highly subjective, I admit, but I've finally said it. And that's the end of that digression.]

* * *

Jonathan:

> [...] can you understand that it was a little unrealistic of you to expect

> people to stop reacting passionately to the issue after only a couple of

> days, especially considering the fact that Victor was still in almost purely

> attack mode at the time?

First, this has gone on for nearly two weeks. Whole discussion boards have been wrecked from only a few days of such turmoil, especially when the owners insist on encouraging digging and flagellation, and OL has had much more than that.

Second, Victor isn't here, and hasn't been for some time. Encouraging attention to be paid to his words or plans elsewhere, whatever their merits - and I've not thought they had very many, and I've told him so - is fanning controversy for its own sake. What plans he talks about over on MeetUp have nothing to do with how this site functions, whether or not they show his contrition or any attempt at making amends.

> [...] you seem to be more pissed off at how people have reacted to Victor's

> misdeeds than they've been pissed off at Victor.

I think you meant "than you've been pissed off at Victor." I'll go with that:

I am greatly upset with him. I also know, and have acted upon, where saying so in detail will do some good, since he isn't here any more: talking with him directly. My adding to the chorus over here isn't going to change anything. Nor have I been shy in decrying his actions. I just haven't chosen to contribute to the general hysteria.

> [...] Some here have been motivated by their desire to make it very unlikely

> that this type of thing will ever happen again - anywhere.

Well, you can't control "anywhere," mmm'kay? Nor can you control everyone. Nor can you even control Victor's more general reputation, let alone his behavior. And it's foolish to even "desire" that you can.

You can control the tenor of this OL site, by your participation. You can decide to whip up continuing Angst and turmoil to let off frustration. No matter how many people may be repelled by it and may choose to leave, or to not sign up in the first place. Or you can let the matter lie and rot, as his plagiarism deserves, and move on to more productive discussion.

* * *

MSK:

> Greybird:

>> MSK:

>>> To be blunt, I think you are enjoying yourself.

>> In regard to what? Would you care to give specifics to such a

>> personal charge? [...]

>> For the record, I "enjoy" none of this. Victor caused grievous injury,

>> both personal and intellectual. And some of the responses to his actions

>> have been neither appropriate, nor productive, nor even fair. I'm dismayed

>> that any of this has happened, on any and all sides.

> I think you are getting a kick out of all the problems everybody is facing with

> this (Pross exempted) and having a ball sitting back and pointing fingers.

> You are entitled to your public opinions. I am entitled to mine. Enjoy yourself

> and be my guest. It's a free show at your end.

In other words, Michael, your answer to my request for specifics is: I'm not going to provide any.

And despite my saying "I 'enjoy' none of this," you're saying that I am. You're thus calling me a liar.

I'm going to have to act accordingly.

* * *

Barbara Branden:

> Steve, in my experience the people on OL are predominantly very decent. [...]

Does that extend, Barbara, to the owner openly and unapologetically calling one of the members a liar, and refusing to provide examples?

I don't think so.

[Ellen Stuttle]

Steve,

Your arguments are primarily with other persons besides me. But I want to respond to two particular points you make. (I'll also add that at this stage I think it's you who's keeping the discussions going more than anyone else. When you persist in making charges against people, there's a high likelihood they'll reply.)

And to avoid rewriting the past, with the broadly hinted implication from many sides: Pross a wanton plagiarist? Why, I never believed what he posted for a second! I never thought his discussion was worthwhile! I never responded positively to him, because I always saw him for what he was! ... Oceania is at war with Eastasia, therefore Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia!

In point of fact, Steve, there are several of us who fairly early on in Victor's OL stay became aware that he copied regularly (though none of us knew quite how regularly, since we weren't bothering to read all of his posts) and who also formed the conclusion that trying to discuss ideas with him was pretty much a waste of time (increasingly it began to look like a total waste of time). This is not "rewriting the past"; this is what the past was.

[....] To me, a responsible approach would have followed a wholly appropriate announcement of Victor having been banned (which MSK did do) with a request that past instances be left rotting, unnoticed, and ultimately abandoned.

Although I agree with you that it's overkill to emphasize the point quite to the extent it's being emphasized in each of Victor's posts (the large-type announcement, e.g., is obtrusive; I think a smaller type-size would do the job), I very much disagree with you about requesting "that past instances be left rotting, unnoticed, and ultimately abandoned."

Past instances, all of them, are injustices to the people whom he plagiarized. I do not think it's fair to them not to identify their work as having been plagiarized, in cases where the source can be identified.

Ellen

___

Edited July 5, 2007 by Ellen Stuttle

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Steve,

Enjoying yourself?

Everybody's talking about Steve and he's telling them how to behave.

Must be Heaven...

(btw - I am civil to everybody. I am just not very civil to you. You get what you dish out.)

EDIT: For the record, "liar" is your term. (I also used to play that game in high-school.) I merely point to a huge discrepancy between your words and acts. Whether this discrepancy is lying per se, I have no opinion yet.

Michael