Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask
 
PerlMonks  

Re: In support of downvoting plagiarism

by jhourcle (Prior)
on Aug 30, 2005 at 11:09 UTC ( [id://487703]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to In support of downvoting plagiarism

It would seem to me that the majority of this thread is discussing the potential reasons for duplicated information, or the lack of harm in it. (note the into, which suggests that I've read the thread, without actually having bothered to go to the bottom of each sub-thread)

What people haven't seemed to discuss, however, is that you have the right to vote however you want -- and you can vote for different things than other people to. If you wanted to pick a random word of the day, and upvote anyone who used it, you can do that. If you wanted to downvote people with sigs that you found annoying, you can do that, too.

Voting, reputation, and xp mean absolutely nothing. (well, maybe not absolutely nothing ... they mean that someone cared enough to click a '++' or '--' radio button, and then click a 'vote' button for the reputation, etc.)

So, back to the topic everyone else is discussing -- there is a significant difference between plagarism, and not adding novel ideas to a discussion. I know there have been times when I've misread or misunderstood someone's response, and replied with what was essentially the same response, thinking that it hadn't been covered already. You're free to downvote me you if you want.

Hell, you can downvote me every time you see my name, if you wish.

Am I going to support your suggestion to downvote every message that seems duplicative in nature? Nope. Am I going to downvote you for suggesting it? Nope. Am I going to vote for messages the way I want to vote for them? Yes.

Update: I appologize -- in my rush to post before leaving for work, I originally stated 'every message that seems duplicative in nature', when Simon's suggestion was to only downvote those that were posted in duplicate a set period of time after the original. I should have better stated myself, as I meant to exclude those through the term 'seems duplicative', but the word 'seems' can have a rather wide possibility for interpretation. Even with that exception, would I select to downvote those messages that are duplicative in nature, and aren't posted within a finite time from the message that they are duplicating? Nope.

  • Comment on Re: In support of downvoting plagiarism

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://487703]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (5)
As of 2024-05-21 23:44 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found