Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Kidneygate made mistakes in their original correspondence with Brennan. They were too overreaching, and didn't focus specifically on the specific images that kidneygate created, which is the heart of the matter. But Brennan now knows she used images in her piece that came originally from a specific creator, and yet has continued to portray herself as the aggrieved one while at the same time removing the images that came from kidneygate. It is nothing like what Larson did, but it also isn't a great look for Brennan.
Agree. It also wouldn’t kill her to acknowledge kidneygate generally as that has likely been the Twitter account to do the most investigative fact finding in this case and almost undoubtedly influenced Brennan although she certainly went outside of kidneygate’s work in doing her own.
I’m just annoyed that this has happened because it’s a victory for Larson. “Even the anti-plagiarists plagiarize sometimes, borrowing ideas when we live online now is just life” etc.
Anonymous wrote:Kidneygate made mistakes in their original correspondence with Brennan. They were too overreaching, and didn't focus specifically on the specific images that kidneygate created, which is the heart of the matter. But Brennan now knows she used images in her piece that came originally from a specific creator, and yet has continued to portray herself as the aggrieved one while at the same time removing the images that came from kidneygate. It is nothing like what Larson did, but it also isn't a great look for Brennan.
Anonymous wrote:Kidneygate made mistakes in their original correspondence with Brennan. They were too overreaching, and didn't focus specifically on the specific images that kidneygate created, which is the heart of the matter. But Brennan now knows she used images in her piece that came originally from a specific creator, and yet has continued to portray herself as the aggrieved one while at the same time removing the images that came from kidneygate. It is nothing like what Larson did, but it also isn't a great look for Brennan.
Anonymous wrote:It’s very accusatory, threatening, and I don’t think it’s accurate. I am familiar with kidneygate’s account and Brennan’s posts. I do not think Brennan relied on kidneygate account to put her timeline together. I am unconvinced that every screenshot is copied. I think kidneygate made a lot of assumptions, and chose to come out guns blazing instead of from a place of collaboration.
I still think it’s possible Brennan didn’t even know these were screenshots from this Twitter account, if for instance she got them from another source. I think making your first contact this aggressive is a mistake, and I think accusing Brennan of basing her entire posts (which I think must have taken her hours to compile) on kidneygate’s account was really unwise without more evidence that a few similar looking screenshots. Screenshotting takes seconds, even if you are adding a highlight. Brennan’s research is clearly original.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Disagree. Kidneygate is being needlessly accusatory here. I think part of Brennan’s point is: she did this thing on her free time to further a conversation. She obviously wasn’t trying to steal anything from anyone. Kidneygate could have asked for attribution instead of attacking her angrily. They didn’t. Brennan is in fact in the hospital with her dad, an ocean away from her husband and clearly under stress. Being polite and granting someone benefit if the doubt is merited. But sending numerous angry DMs and putting someone “on blast”. Brennan has every right to call out this behavior.
Had kidneygate just DMed Brennan and saying “this is a great timeline but I do think some of those screenshots are from my account (which you mat not have realized) — can you provide attribution? I have put a lot of work into reporting on this issue”, Brennan would have been gracious. Instead, kidneygate sent multiple angry and accusatory DMs.
But… that’s exactly what kidneygate did. It’s bizarre because Brennan very clearly lifted the screenshots from kidneygate, as evidenced by the stitched up court documents that kidneygate put together.
How do you know kidneygate was not accusatory or angry in their DM? Brennan said they were, and the tone of kidneygate tweets on the matter have been very terse and aggrieved.
Anonymous wrote:
Disagree. Kidneygate is being needlessly accusatory here. I think part of Brennan’s point is: she did this thing on her free time to further a conversation. She obviously wasn’t trying to steal anything from anyone. Kidneygate could have asked for attribution instead of attacking her angrily. They didn’t. Brennan is in fact in the hospital with her dad, an ocean away from her husband and clearly under stress. Being polite and granting someone benefit if the doubt is merited. But sending numerous angry DMs and putting someone “on blast”. Brennan has every right to call out this behavior.
Had kidneygate just DMed Brennan and saying “this is a great timeline but I do think some of those screenshots are from my account (which you mat not have realized) — can you provide attribution? I have put a lot of work into reporting on this issue”, Brennan would have been gracious. Instead, kidneygate sent multiple angry and accusatory DMs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Disagree. Kidneygate is being needlessly accusatory here. I think part of Brennan’s point is: she did this thing on her free time to further a conversation. She obviously wasn’t trying to steal anything from anyone. Kidneygate could have asked for attribution instead of attacking her angrily. They didn’t. Brennan is in fact in the hospital with her dad, an ocean away from her husband and clearly under stress. Being polite and granting someone benefit if the doubt is merited. But sending numerous angry DMs and putting someone “on blast”. Brennan has every right to call out this behavior.
Had kidneygate just DMed Brennan and saying “this is a great timeline but I do think some of those screenshots are from my account (which you mat not have realized) — can you provide attribution? I have put a lot of work into reporting on this issue”, Brennan would have been gracious. Instead, kidneygate sent multiple angry and accusatory DMs.
But… that’s exactly what kidneygate did. It’s bizarre because Brennan very clearly lifted the screenshots from kidneygate, as evidenced by the stitched up court documents that kidneygate put together.
Anonymous wrote:
Disagree. Kidneygate is being needlessly accusatory here. I think part of Brennan’s point is: she did this thing on her free time to further a conversation. She obviously wasn’t trying to steal anything from anyone. Kidneygate could have asked for attribution instead of attacking her angrily. They didn’t. Brennan is in fact in the hospital with her dad, an ocean away from her husband and clearly under stress. Being polite and granting someone benefit if the doubt is merited. But sending numerous angry DMs and putting someone “on blast”. Brennan has every right to call out this behavior.
Had kidneygate just DMed Brennan and saying “this is a great timeline but I do think some of those screenshots are from my account (which you mat not have realized) — can you provide attribution? I have put a lot of work into reporting on this issue”, Brennan would have been gracious. Instead, kidneygate sent multiple angry and accusatory DMs.