|
The latest on Ann Coulter
Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:12:04 -0400
rec.arts.tv
previous
NewportsRetro...
|
She's obviously proficient at lying and stealing:
Shoof...
|
I'm no Ann Coulter apologist but it seems to me that if someone has written
tens of thousands paragraphs over the years like Coulter has, and some
computer comparison program comes up with three sentences that were almost
identical, that is pretty good evidence that Coulter goes out of her way to
make sure she does the opposite of your claim.
David Johnston...
|
Of course that isn't an accurate recounting of the story. What the
story claims is that she duplicated three different "passages" in her
book alone ranging from 24 words to 33 words. If those were single
sentences then her prose must be awful. The odds are low that you
could precisely duplicate a 33 word passage by chance even compared to
everything that's ever been written.
However, since she took her passages from separate sources, that isn't
plagiarism. It's just a failure to accurately identify your sources.
Justin Pate...
|
I can forgive her for that.
David Johnston...
|
I'm sure you can forgive her for a lot more.
|
|
tomcervo...
|
Gee, and with a straight face, too.
If you regard plagiarism as a matter of theft, the items stolen are of
too little value to make it worth a lawsuit. If you make it a matter of
ethics . . . what am I saying? Coulter? ETHICS? It's not like she has
a reputation capable of being damaged further.
And if that photo is anything to go by, her sellby date is looming
fast, boob job notwithstanding.
FDR...
|
yeah, Osama Bin Coulter could never be confused with ethics.
|
|
|
I wonder how some other authors, columnists, and politicians would stack up
under that scrutiny.
marc0ni...
|
Exactly. Talk about cherry-picking your data. Not only that, but the
article doesn't tell us anything about this supposed "leading
plagiarism-recognition system" other than its name. I'd be a lot more
interested in finding how such a program works before I accepted its
results as definitive.
But it seems that if someone calls himself an "expert" and then tells
you what you want to hear, that's the only evidence some people need.
|
|
|
next
|