Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This dude literally came out and said, "this is normal recurrent use of language in science." This is so absurd and basically takes a big peepee all over the scientific method and academic research. That alone should be clear evidence that he isn't qualified to be president of a research university

Show me where he said “normal”

Saying “not uncommon” is basically the same thing as saying normal. Because yes, this level of plagiarism most certainly IS UNCOMMON and would get your article retracted at any respectable academic journal

https://kcby.com/news/nation-world/university-of-maryland-rejects-plagiarism-accusation-against-school-president-college-park-joshua-altmann-umd-darryll-pines-australian-higher-education-academia-umd-dc-college-uni-dissertation

It would not merit a retraction.
The writing was deemed to be acceptable quality at publication. Nothing new and disqualifying about the writing has been discovered

It would merit a correction to add quotation and citation, disciplinary action against the author for their misbehavior, and public lesson to the community about proper credit.

As an editor an academic journal, I can tell that you have no idea what you are talking about, or your field is incredibly outside the norm of standards at the majority of journals. See here for a bog list of all the retracted papers due to plagiarism (https://retractionwatch.com/category/by-reason-for-retraction/plagiarism/)

Those are cases where the actual research was plagiarized and falsified, which is obviously not correctable. That's not the case reported with ones's paper.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This dude literally came out and said, "this is normal recurrent use of language in science." This is so absurd and basically takes a big peepee all over the scientific method and academic research. That alone should be clear evidence that he isn't qualified to be president of a research university

Show me where he said “normal”

Saying “not uncommon” is basically the same thing as saying normal. Because yes, this level of plagiarism most certainly IS UNCOMMON and would get your article retracted at any respectable academic journal

https://kcby.com/news/nation-world/university-of-maryland-rejects-plagiarism-accusation-against-school-president-college-park-joshua-altmann-umd-darryll-pines-australian-higher-education-academia-umd-dc-college-uni-dissertation

It would not merit a retraction.
The writing was deemed to be acceptable quality at publication. Nothing new and disqualifying about the writing has been discovered

It would merit a correction to add quotation and citation, disciplinary action against the author for their misbehavior, and public lesson to the community about proper credit.

As an editor an academic journal, I can tell that you have no idea what you are talking about, or your field is incredibly outside the norm of standards at the majority of journals. See here for a bog list of all the retracted papers due to plagiarism (https://retractionwatch.com/category/by-reason-for-retraction/plagiarism/)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well check out this racist article which in its first paragraph says, "it's all thanks to the jews":
http://www.blackengineer.com/people/walking-dead/president-pines-next-on-the-choking-board/

That tends to happens when you search the internet for shady websites that use ai images for their images....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The source is lame, OP.

I see you left out the conservative aspect of the accusing publication in your original post.


“An article published Tuesday in The Daily Wire, a conservative American media outlet, asserted Pines lifted portions of the papers from a website published in 1996.”

Why would an American conservative publication care about the UMD president? Hmmm…

So let me flip this for you...if a liberal organization outs a conservative for obvious dishonesty or some other misdeed, then it's okay for other conservatives to ignore the facts presented? I really do not like where I see our society going.

The Daily Wire is a profoundly dishonest propaganda operation that pushes obvious lies on behalf of oligarchs. I’m not aware of a liberal leaning publication that pushes agendas like that, except maybe The Intercept, which is trash.

That doesn’t make this story untrue, but let’s be clear about who’s publishing the story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The source is lame, OP.

I see you left out the conservative aspect of the accusing publication in your original post.


“An article published Tuesday in The Daily Wire, a conservative American media outlet, asserted Pines lifted portions of the papers from a website published in 1996.”

Why would an American conservative publication care about the UMD president? Hmmm…

So let me flip this for you...if a liberal organization outs a conservative for obvious dishonesty or some other misdeed, then it's okay for other conservatives to ignore the facts presented? I really do not like where I see our society going.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well check out this racist article which in its first paragraph says, "it's all thanks to the jews":
http://www.blackengineer.com/people/walking-dead/president-pines-next-on-the-choking-board/

That tends to happens when you search the internet for shady websites that use ai images for their images....

Anonymous wrote:Well check out this racist article which in its first paragraph says, "it's all thanks to the jews":
http://www.blackengineer.com/people/walking-dead/president-pines-next-on-the-choking-board/

Anonymous wrote:What is there to defend? He is a thief.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This dude literally came out and said, "this is normal recurrent use of language in science." This is so absurd and basically takes a big peepee all over the scientific method and academic research. That alone should be clear evidence that he isn't qualified to be president of a research university

Show me where he said “normal”

Saying “not uncommon” is basically the same thing as saying normal. Because yes, this level of plagiarism most certainly IS UNCOMMON and would get your article retracted at any respectable academic journal

https://kcby.com/news/nation-world/university-of-maryland-rejects-plagiarism-accusation-against-school-president-college-park-joshua-altmann-umd-darryll-pines-australian-higher-education-academia-umd-dc-college-uni-dissertation

It would not merit a retraction.
The writing was deemed to be acceptable quality at publication. Nothing new and disqualifying about the writing has been discovered

It would merit a correction to add quotation and citation, disciplinary action against the author for their misbehavior, and public lesson to the community about proper credit.