Forum etiquette #2

Originally posted by sonhouse
Still, it is just perpetuating the big scam.

Sure, but attacking someone for plagiarism because you don't like their religion is a also morally wrong. It is entirely possible that sonship is guilty of plagiarism but even if he is blatantly doing it, it is far from the worst behaviour he exhibits.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Sure, but attacking someone for plagiarism because you don't like their religion is a also morally wrong. It is entirely possible that sonship is guilty of plagiarism but even if he is blatantly doing it, it is far from the worst behaviour he exhibits.

It is also morally wrong to attack another poster by suggesting he has "worst" behavior, especially when replying to a poster that makes some of the most virulent verbal and hateful attacks against the Christian God and His followers in this forum.

Originally posted by josephw
It is also morally wrong to attack another poster by suggesting he has "worst" behavior, especially when replying to a poster that makes some of the most virulent verbal and hateful attacks against the Christian God and His followers in this forum.

Who is it you think makes some of the most virulent verbal and hateful attacks against the Christian God and His followers in this forum? Are you referring to the indefatigably anti-religion sonhouse or do you mean the abusive chaney3 (when he's drunk) who called the Bible "man made BS", God worse than Hitler, and his followers evil/insane, or do you mean Eladar when he's referring to fellow Christians as "children of Satan"? Who is it you mean?

Originally posted by FMF
Who is it you think makes some of the most virulent verbal and hateful attacks against the Christian God and His followers in this forum? Are you referring to the indefatigably anti-religion sonhouse or do you mean the abusive chaney3 (when he's drunk) who called the Bible "man made BS", God worse than Hitler, and his followers evil/insane, or do you mean Eladar when he's referring to fellow Christians as "children of Satan"? Who is it you mean?

He's clearly talking about you, you narcissistic windbag.

Originally posted by Suzianne
He's clearly talking about you, you narcissistic windbag.

But [1] twhitehead and josephw did not appear to be talking about me, and [2] it surely isn't true to say that I make "the most virulent verbal and hateful attacks against the Christian God and His followers in this forum". If you believe I am wrong about [2] can you cite an example of one of my posts that you think is among the most most "virulent" and "hateful" attacks on this forum?

Originally posted by Suzianne
It's been well-known for some time now that he is a student of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee and Living Stream Ministries.

I have also read a fair bit of Watchman Nee and many other Christian authors. There is no doubt that their thinking shaped my own thinking at various times and perhaps some of their ideas have remained with me. But I'm not posting their ministry in this forum as my own.

Most authors will provide acknowledgement of others ideas or ministry either in the "acknowledgements" section or through a notational reference within the text:

Such as like this for >example¹< ... with a footer acknowledgment of the author. At the very least the author will acknowledge his source within the body of the text.

It's paying respect for the original work and demonstrating intellectual honesty.

Originally posted by josephw
Yes.

It would be wrong up to the degree you passed off another's words as your own.

I'm not convinced sonship went that far.

Irrespective of mine and at least one other person's view of sonship's material being plagiarised, sonship himself has admitted in a current thread that he takes context from other ministers, rewords it and posts in here. In my opinion this is plagiarism if it is not accredited. I acknowledge that sonship does not get paid for posting here, but that is not the point, the point is poster credibility and intellectual honesty.

Originally posted by josephw
It is also morally wrong to attack another poster by suggesting he has "worst" behavior, especially when replying to a poster that makes some of the most virulent verbal and hateful attacks against the Christian God and His followers in this forum.

I think you are taking sonhouse far too seriously in this respect of "attacking". I agree that sometimes he misses the point (such as on page one), but it is his right to speak his mind.

Originally posted by chaney3
You don't provide much either supergirl.

Look at the twig in your eye, and ignore the speck in mine.

twig? haha more like suzzisnowflakes logging factory!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
twig? haha more like suzzisnowflakes logging factory!

This is pretty much the level of what we can expect from you in these austere end-of-days isn't it.

Originally posted by divegeester
I have also read a fair bit of Watchman Nee and many other Christian authors. There is no doubt that their thinking shaped my own thinking at various times and perhaps some of their ideas have remained with me. But I'm not posting their ministry in this forum as my own.

Most authors will provide acknowledgement of others ideas or ministry either in t ...[text shortened]... the text.

It's paying respect for the original work and demonstrating intellectual honesty.

But I wouldn't call espousing those ideas as "plagiarizing".

I mean, if you are a student of someone, then naturally you espouse the very same ideas. Plagiarism would be if he presented the text of some of their material here as his own. Just speaking 'off-the-cuff' in the same manner they would, with the same concepts, doesn't seem to rise to the equivalency of plagiarism. You make it sound like he typed out one of their pamphlets in its entirety, claiming it as his work.

For example, there are some on the Debates Forum who accept and agree with the philosophy of Ayn Rand. I do not go so far as to accuse them of plagiarism every time they post. Now if they presented large passages of The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged as their own writing, I might.

Do you see the difference?



(I'm not saying I do not believe in accreditation, I do. I think that is all he should be accused of, if even that. Plagiarism is the wholesale lifting of another's work. This is why copyright laws exist.)

Originally posted by FMF
But, Suzianne, I am not suggesting that he shouldn't post Christian views here. You don't seem to understand what is being discussed.

Twist, twist, twist.

"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

Originally posted by Suzianne
But I wouldn't call espousing those ideas as "plagiarizing".

I think that divegeester has taken it slightly too far with the word "plagiarizing" (in terms of how the word is conventionally used) and that he might have simply described sonship's posting style as too often being wholesale regurgitation of someone else's ideas - often almost to the point (or past it) of spamming.

I would add that this voluminous bulk regurgitation-style lecturing (and frequent refusal to engage dissent or scrutiny) is rather against the spirit of a debate and discussion message board and probably more properly belongs on some other internet facility.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Twist, twist, twist.

"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

"Twist"? How so. I am quite simply not suggesting that sonship should not post his Christian views here. You are making stuff up.