Deleted Threads by Admin??

I am far from being knowledgeable about these plagiarism, copyright, and patent issues (although I think that my previous post was basically talking about fair use of those earlier quotes). However, I think that most of the academic works (published studies and such) do contain references somewhere at the end.

trelja,

I agree on all of your points about plagiarism. However, in this particular case I think it may be a little bit softer case. What I have learned since first reading celander’s post is that those words are quite well-known. I had no clue, but it also seems that I may be the only one reading this thread who had never heard/read it. In light of that, it might have been just an innocent quote that celander expected everyone knew and that he used to emphasize whatever he wanted to emphasize with it. Sort of like me writing "I can’t get no satisfaction" in some post without explicitly giving credit to actual writers of the song. I would expect that everyone knows about it, especially in the forum like this, and that nobody would think I was pretending it was mine from the beginning of time.

Of course, I have no idea what celander actually thought while writing, but I would give him benefit of the doubt on this one. He does not come across as a fool who would think he could sell something this widely-known to a spectatorship like this. Around here, everyone is just waiting to jump and tear apart. True, it would have been no arguing had he started with "to paraphrase XYZ...", but hat the heck.

Again, as far as plagiarism goes, I agree with you 100%.

To be in tune with this thread...

And I’m neither left or right
I’m just staying home tonight
Getting lost in that hopeless little screen

(Not my lyrics, but as true as it gets)

Now it makes sense. Sweet, wise-appearing, but really not much if you scrutinize it. (I am talking about original, not celander's placement of the quote in this thread).

I admit that I thought that celander’s post in question was his original and would continue thinking so had it not been for others who objected. I am not sure if that would be considered plagiarism, when an uninformed person is not given clear explanation, but I understand that many people quote others with no ill intentions. For whatever reason, I feel that was the case here. Not exactly pretending those are his own words, but instead probably thinking everybody would have recognized them. Those of us who did not know any better were slightly mislead, but no harm was done. Now we learned something. Even two new names.

As for the text itself, nicely written, but must be from some old time. Parts of it are barely relevant these days although hard to dispute outside of the reasonably-willing group.