Reply #105: Not that anyone needs my $0.02, but...

[Plaid Adder]

I think it looks like Moore's pledge was heavily "inspired" by The Witch's post, but I think it would be hard to prove plagiarism.

Basically what the two documents have in common is the premise, the structure, and several of the ideas. The writing is very different; Moore's pledge is much more elaborate and incorporates a lot of stuff that's not in The Witch's post. The Witch's side-by-side comparison above emphasizes the similarities (of which there are plenty) by pulling out the sentences that are closest to the ones she originally posted; Moore's pledge also includes a lot of material that has to have been generated by someone else.

The similarity in terms of the points made could be a result of GMTA (after all, we all know exactly what the Republicans have done to us, and any pledge not to do the same things to them would have to include a number of the points that come up in both documents no matter who wrote it). It's the similarity in terms of premise and structure that worries me. It seems plausible to me that Moore or someone on his staff saw The Witch's post, thought a liberal pledge to conservatives was a great idea, and then came up with "their own version" of it for Moore's website.

If that's what happened, then The Witch should certainly have been credited. "Borrowing" ideas without crediting the source is plagiarism, even when there is no word-for-word copying. The fact that The Witch's post originally appeared on the Web on a public forum means nothing. If any of you have been plagiarizing stuff you see on the Web because you're under the impression that it's not protected or that stealing it isn't wrong, I advise you to stop. It is protected, and stealing it is wrong. The correct way to disseminate an idea or a post you see on the web is to credit and if possible link to the original source when you distribute or comment on it.

If this were just a GD post I would be willing to say it is an uncanny example of the collective consiousness at work and leave it at that. However, since it was featured on the DU front page right after the election, that increases the chances that someone on Moore's team spotted it and appropriated the idea.

I think it would make sense for The Witch or one of the DU admins to bring the similarities to the attention of someone at Moore's site and ask for an explanation. But I would not expect to be able to "prove" that this is plagiarism no matter what they tell you; the two documents are different enough to provide plenty of deniability. If this really IS plagiarism, that makes it in my mind especially sleazy. Without knowing what happened, though, I'm not prepared to say it is.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder