Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"

Re^2: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

by Hue-Bond (Priest)
on Oct 07, 2006 at 04:19 UTC ( #576793=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?
in thread How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

Seconded. Regarding the "shunning wall" and the approval disabling, I like it for two reasons:

  • Without it, those monks who become Friars in the future and are not aware of this problem would unwittingly approve and/or frontpage nodes by "shunned" monks, so something should be done to prevent this; if not this feature, some explicit mention of the issue in, for example, How do I moderate?, could be appropriate.
  • More importantly, jesuashok has enough power to approve (his own) nodes. If a decision is made not to approve offenders' posts, some technical restriction must be implemented.

David Serrano

  • Comment on Re^2: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?
by planetscape (Chancellor) on Oct 07, 2006 at 04:38 UTC

    Technically, one cannot approve or front-page one's own nodes. However, if one is working in concert with another, it's obviously possible to see how one account can approve, front-page, upvote another, etc. Approval can be withdrawn by janitors, though, and anyone who suspects behaviour as outlined above is advised to give the gods and/or janitors a heads-up. (janitors as a user-group can be messaged the same way you'd message another Monk.)

      Well here's at least one example of one approving the other's plagiarism.

      One dead unjugged rabbit fish later

        There are many actually. Also interesting is the preponderance of root nodes madtoperl posted. Most monks who have been around for a while have contributed many more replies than they have root nodes.

        DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel
Re^3: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?
by GrandFather (Sage) on Oct 07, 2006 at 05:12 UTC

    I'm sure there are enough interested janitors to keep an eye on the nodes and unapprove them if need be.

    Adding a janitorial edit note to the node indicating why it shouldn't be approved should generally be sufficient, although the OP can re-edit to remove such a note. The node can be reaped if need be, but that doesn't give the perp a chance to redeem himself - we should at least allow that chance.

    DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://576793]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (5)
As of 2020-09-30 06:30 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    If at first I donít succeed, I Ö

    Results (160 votes). Check out past polls.