Silverseren

joined 1 year ago
[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 25 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I indeed saw plenty of that in various comment sections and social media.

Does anyone seriously want to make the asinine claim that this sort of response is because of claimed plagiarism?

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So, single or partial sentence issues less than 5 times in each article. Articles that are many, many pages long, as such published articles are wont to do, yes? Again, this just sounds like an "you should extend a reference to cover this as well" sort of suggestion and not a major issue.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago (3 children)

The examples you gave are also incredibly minor. I've taught students and dealt with plagiarism for years. Single sentence or partial sentence pieces like that are a minimal issue and, if considered one by the author, easily fixed with some quotation marks.

It's very obviously looking for a problem because it isn't the claimed plagiarism anyone actually cares about, but exists as a convenient excuse attempt.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 10 points 10 months ago (5 children)

And yet Swain seems to care about other things than the claimed plagiarism, which she didn't even mention in her call to have Gay fired. No, she cares a lot more that Gay wasn't vociferously pro-Israel and didn't expel the students for their pro-Palestine speech.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 23 points 10 months ago

This Carol Swain? Yeah, no, it has nothing to do with plagiarism, it has to do with Swain being pro-ethnic cleansing and is mad that Claudine Gay didn't expel all Palestinian students or some other extreme action to show loyalty to Israel.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

We all know that plagiarism was not the real issue here. It was a convenient excuse to call for her resignation, but it was the other thing listed above that was the real push by certain well known non-profit groups to get her fired.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social -5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nothing of what you posted was even a claim one way or the other. Yes, Clinton's campaign did try and prop up Trump over the other Republican candidates because they thought he would be an easier opponent because of how insane he is. They were wrong on how insane the general public is as well.

Those are just known facts.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social -3 points 10 months ago (5 children)

The questions they also gave to Bernie? His own senior advisor admitted when asked that they were also given the questions about Flint, ect.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social -5 points 10 months ago (10 children)

I mean, if we're going to pivot to conspiracies from the 2016 vote, we can bring up the coin toss thing. Brought up repeatedly as a conspiracy by Bernie supporters, they always seemed to leave out that there were multiple coin tosses across counties in that state and...Bernie won more of them than Hillary did. He just lost the vote so badly in total in that state that that didn't give him enough delegates to win the state as a whole.

But, for some reason, Bernie and his supporters only talk about a single one of those coin tosses.

view more: ‹ prev next ›