The Instigator
Legitdebater
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Benshapiro
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

I Should Have Won This Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/30/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,245 times Debate No: 36149
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (27)
Votes (0)

 

Legitdebater

Pro

The resolution is taken from the debate: Non-GMO Food is more Beneficial to Society than GMO Food. Link here: http://www.debate.org...; I should've won because my opponent, Subutai, plagiarised the majority of his arguments in this debate. Now, I have nothing against Subutai and I think it was a misunderstanding and he unintentionally plagiarised his arguments.

Definitions:

Plagiarism: According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, to plagiarize is








        • to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own [1]












According to plagiarism.org, plagiarism also includes "failing to put a quotation in quotation marks."[1] which is what Subutai failed to do in most of his arguments. Subutai copy and pasted whole paragraphs without putting quotation marks in[2]. Yes, he sourced them, but failed to quote whole copy and pasted paragraphs which is still considered plagiarism.

Burden of Proof: On me, Pro.

Ultimately, I should have won since plagiarism is considered unacceptable on DDO. airmax1227, the President of DDO, awards conduct and usually arguments to the other person.[3] Since plagiarism is considered unacceptable on DDO and an act of fraud, I should've won.

Sources: http://plagiarism.org...[1]
http://www.debate.org...;[2]
http://www.debate.org...;[3]




**Note**
Whether or not Subutai decides to accept this himself, is completely up to him. However, if he doesn't accept this, he cannot vote during voting period as this would be extremely biased. If he does, however, it will result in an automatic vote-bomb and will be countered by the next voter. Remember, I'm not saying Subutai is a notorious plagiarizer, I'm just saying it was probably a misunderstanding. First round is acceptance.
Debate Round No. 1
Legitdebater

Pro

Thank you Benshapiro for accepting this debate. I hope we'll have a fun, meaningfull debate. For the convenience of the readers and I, I think we'll keep this debate short and sweet. I don't think that'll be a problem though. Anyways let's get to the debate shall we.

My Arguments

Plagiarism isn't accepted on DDO, and is considered cheating

Basically, my opponent plagiarized by copy and pasting whole paragraphs without putting quotes around them. Here is an example: Information he got on CSA site:

If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant Sciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A)13.

Subutai: If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant

Sciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A)...[1][6][11] [2] (my source)


According to plagiarism.org, not quoting direct quotations properly is considered a form of plagiarism[1]. Even though he sourced them, he failed to put quotations.

Plagiarizers get deducted conduct and argument points

DDO president, airmax1227, gives conduct and arguments to the person who wasn't plagiarizing in debates where this is the case. [3] Most competent voters deduct conduct and arguments to the plagiarizers.

Therefore, I should have won.

Sources: http://plagiarism.org...;[1]
http://www.debate.org...;[2]
http://www.debate.org...;[3]



Benshapiro

Con

Plagiarism isn't accepted on DDO, and is considered cheating.

True, however, you must take into account that it was true plagiarism. This form of plagiarism was unintended because he referrenced the source he pulled from. Given, word-for-word copy and pasted chunks is not good even though he cited the source and should have been deducted conduct and argument points for it (which he was).

It can be likened to making a mistake on a job application, where the signature of the applicant shows that he believes all of the information to be true, but made a mistake in references along the way. In this case, he is held responsible for his fault, but it cannot be shown that his intent was to plagiarize since he referenced the sources.

Plagiarizers get deducted conduct and argument points

He was deducted condunct and argument points for this reason. This debate was won based on voting criteria, which conduct and argument points are only a part of, and given the nature of this form of unintentional plagiarism - subutai clearly won.

Debate Round No. 2
Legitdebater

Pro

My Refutations

Plagiarism isn't accepted on DDO, and is considered cheating

Con: "True, however, you must take into account that it was true plagiarism"

I did actually take into account that it was a form of plagiarism according to plagiarism.org.

Con also states the this form of plagiarism was unintended because he referenced the source he got it from. As true as this may be, this doesn't change the fact that it's still plagiarism. Numerous websites point out that you must quote and source words directly coming from the author, namely Harvard University.[1]

My opponent: "Given, word-for-word copy and pasted chunks is not good even though he cited the source and should have been deducted conduct and argument points for it (which he was)."

No, he was not deducted arguments and conduct points. Where's your proof? Out of the four votes, he was not deducted arguments or conduct points for plagiarism. [2] However, you're right that it wasn't good enough that he cited the source.

Con: "It can be likened to making a mistake on a job application, where the signature of the applicant shows that he believes all of the information to be true, but made a mistake in references along the way. In this case, he is held responsible for his fault, but it cannot be shown that his intent was to plagiarize since he referenced the sources."

I'm assuming Con is implying that job applier made a mistake quoting as this has no relevance to the debate. In the case, the employer would probably tell him it was plagiarism and deny him the job.

Plagiarizers get dedected conduct and argument points

No, he was not deducted conduct, (assuming you mean conduct) and argument points as I've said before. Did you even look at the debate?

My oppenent claims that since conduct and arguments are only a part of the debate and that it was unintentional plagiarism, Subutai should've won. However, this is still plagiarism which causes plagiarizer to lose conduct and arguments. That means that competent voters that knew Subutai (not subutai) was plagiarizing, would have awarded me conduct and arguments. Consequently, this would cause me to win the debate.

I look forward to your next arguments. You should probably read the debate, please.

Sources: http://isites.harvard.edu...;[1]
http://www.debate.org...;[2]
Benshapiro

Con

It would help if you didn't criticize me on not reading the debate then use a broken link to it. I did read it and look at the voting section through your profile.

"Con also states the this form of plagiarism was unintended because he referenced the source he got it from. As true as this may be, this doesn't change the fact that it's still plagiarism."

You admit that it is a form of plagiarism, but then say it is plagiarism. It was a case of incorrect sourcing, which is a form of (unintentional) plagiarism, not plagiarism. It is not the same. You could say that people who accidentally kill other people in car accidents are murderers, but it's unintentional manslaughter.

The conduct points were tied but arguments weren't. You say that he should've been deducted by plagiarizing. If the plagiarism wasn't evident to the 4 people who voted, did it really detract that much from the debate? Voters aren't machines, they overlook some details just like a jury might overlook minor evidence in court. The same rule we have in court of double-jeopardy should be applied to that debate. He won fair and square based on the decisions and information the voters acted on.

Making an unintentional mistake on a job application in the reference source is relevant to this debate, since he made a mistake in how he referenced a few of his sources. Ultimately it us up to the employer to decide whether or not the applicants signature that verifies all of the information in the application is true based on the integrity of the applicant - he can be denied the job for his error but it does not bar him from it - whether or not to give the applicant a job is at his discretion. The point of making this analogy is that Subutai (applicant) made a mistake in the referencing process but the voters (employer) decided to overlook it and accepted it. Therefore Subutai won on fair grounds.

Debate Round No. 3
Legitdebater

Pro

**Sorry I posted a broken link. For some reason, every time that I copy and paste the link into my arguments, it ends up broken. However, Merrit posted the correct link in the comments section to the original debate and I posted the correct link for the forum in Round 2. It seems to work in the comments section.
My Final Refutations

Con: "You admit that it is a form of plagiarism, but then say it is plagiarism. It was a case of incorrect sourcing, which is a form of (unintentional) plagiarism, not plagiarism. It is not the same. You could say that people who accidentally kill other people in car accidents are murderers, but it's unintentional manslaughter."

A form of plagiarism is merely a type plagiarism. Copy and pasting whole paragraphs without quoting them properly is considered a specific type of plagiarism. The analogy between murder and manslaughter is different. Murder is seperate from manslaughter, however, an inadequate paraphrase is a type of plagiarism. Therefore, a form of plagiarism is plagiarism, just a specific type. Let's go back to my Harvard University website, shall we? What Subutai commited whether intentional or not, was an inadequate paraphrase.

Here's what Harvard states:

Inadequate paraphrase

"When you paraphrase, your task is to distill the source's ideas in your own words. It's not enough to change a few words here and there and leave the rest; instead, you must completely restate the ideas in the passage in your own words. If your own language is too close to the original, then you are plagiarizing, even if you do provide a citation."[1]

Here's another example of one of his (Subutai) inadequate paraphrases:

Subutai:So if miRNAs are dangerous " guess what? " you"re already ingesting them every time you eat. And, to get a little gross, let"s be clear: when we eat something, we don"t just ingest the miRNAs from the species we intentionally eat. Did you know, for example, that foods you eat are allowed to contain mold, hair, insect parts, and even rat poop? All of those bits of organisms which we inadvertently eat have DNA, and " you guessed it! " miRNAs, too. If miRNAs are so dangerous, we would never have been able to eat anything previously alive in the first place.[7][8]

His source: So if miRNAs are dangerous " guess what? " you"re already ingesting them every time you eat. And, to get a little gross, let"s be clear: when we eat something, we don"t just ingest the miRNAs from the species we intentionally eat. Did you know, for example, that foods you eat are allowed to contain mold, hair, insect parts, and even rat poop? All of those bits of organisms which we inadvertently eat have DNA, and " you guessed it! " miRNAs, too. If miRNAs are so dangerous, we would never have been able to eat anything previously alive in the first place. [2]

Clearly this is plagiarism.

Plagiarizers get deducted conduct and argument points

My opponent states that plagiarism wasn't evident to any of the 4 who voted and it didn't detract much from the debate. However, one of the voters (rross) realized after the debate that what Subutai did was clearly plagiarism. If you look at the debate again, rross criticized Subutai in the comments section. Yes, voters aren't machines, but what I'm saying is that I should have won sine Subutai plagiarized (given the evidence from Harvard University). Con also states that he won fair and square based on the decisions and information the voters acted on. However, the voters didn't know that Subutai plagiarized. Did he win fair and square? Rross figured it out too late; she only realized this after the debate.

Experienced debater philochristos agreed this was plagiarism too and related it to the case of Steven Ambrose. [2]


Con:Making an unintentional mistake on a job application in the reference source is relevant to this debate, since he made a mistake in how he referenced a few of his sources. Ultimately it us up to the employer to decide whether or not the applicants signature that verifies all of the information in the application is true based on the integrity of the applicant - he can be denied the job for his error but it does not bar him from it - whether or not to give the applicant a job is at his discretion. The point of making this analogy is that Subutai (applicant) made a mistake in the referencing process but the voters (employer) decided to overlook it and accepted it. Therefore Subutai won on fair grounds.

Subutai didn't make a mistake on a few of his sources. The majority of his arguments were copy and pasted without quoting them properly. The voters didn't decide to overlook it, they just didn't know that he plagiarized. So yeah, Subutai did win on fair grounds, that is if a plagiarizer wins of fair grounds. If we go back to the analogy about the jury, airmax1227 would be the judge. Airmax1227 deducts conduct and arguments from the plagiarizer, and since he's a competent voter, he probably would've given me them. By that logic, I should've won since plagiarism isn't accepted in DDO.

Conclusion: Con fails to negate my resolution by basically saying that a form plagiarism isn't plagiarism. Even if he did it unintentionally, I still should have won. Plagiarism is cheating.

Sources: http://isites.harvard.edu...
Source 2 in comments


Benshapiro

Con

I putting my rebuttals in bold to avoid confusion.

"A form of plagiarism is merely a type plagiarism. Copy and pasting whole paragraphs without quoting them properly is considered a specific type of plagiarism. The analogy between murder and manslaughter is different. Murder is seperate from manslaughter, however, an inadequate paraphrase is a type of plagiarism. Therefore, a form of plagiarism is plagiarism, just a specific type. Let's go back to my Harvard University website, shall we? What Subutai commited whether intentional or not, was an inadequate paraphrase."

My point is that his form of plagiarism is not the same at intentionally plagairizing. He referenced the source and failed to put quotes around it. The analogy I made works. Manslaughter is a form of murder although you wouldn't call it murder. Failing to put quotes but citing the source is a form of plagiarism, although you wouldn't call it plagiarism.

You reference Harvard University as if it were the standard on which all citing is referenced. It's a prestigious school, but the requirements of Harvard and debate.org are not one in the same.

"My opponent states that plagiarism wasn't evident to any of the 4 who voted and it didn't detract much from the debate. However, one of the voters (rross) realized after the debate that what Subutai did was clearly plagiarism. If you look at the debate again, rross criticized Subutai in the comments section. Yes, voters aren't machines, but what I'm saying is that I should have won sine Subutai plagiarized (given the evidence from Harvard University). Con also states that he won fair and square based on the decisions and information the voters acted on. However, the voters didn't know that Subutai plagiarized. Did he win fair and square? Rross figured it out too late; she only realized this after the debate."

As I stated earlier, voters are not machines and have to make their best judgement with the evidence they have. At the time of the debate, none of the 4 voters noticed the lack of quotation marks. It is silly to go back through debates that are already decided and claim to have won based on voter criteria that was made in the best judgement of the voters. They have a double-jeopardy rule in court where if you are found not-guilty, you cannot be tried again. The same rule should apply here. Especially for a minor technicality like this.

"If we go back to the analogy about the jury, airmax1227 would be the judge. Airmax1227 deducts conduct and arguments from the plagiarizer, and since he's a competent voter, he probably would've given me them. By that logic, I should've won since plagiarism isn't accepted in DDO."

That is based purely on speculation, and I have reason to believe armax1227 would agree with me since the debate has already been decided by best judgements of the voters. Voters were given the power by design to decide the outcome of a debate. Since none of the voters noticed the mistake in quotation at the time of the vote, his win should remain. The claim that you should have won the debate is false based on this evidence.

Thank you
Debate Round No. 4
27 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
You didn't quote it bro.
Posted by Benshapiro 3 years ago
Benshapiro
I put quotes around the source and cited it at the bottom. It's not plagiarism...
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
Lol, I think I know why Benshapiro accepted this. He's a plagiarizer himself! At least Subutai probably unintentionally plagiarized. Check out this debate: http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
Sure, we'll do just that. We'll copy and paste with some slight modifications.
Posted by Subutai 3 years ago
Subutai
@Legitdebater: Then I guess that leaves the question of whether or not you just want to copy/paste our arguments from the first debate onto another debate (with some slight modifications, of course!), or if you want to pursue an entirely new debate. I'm inclined to go the former path, with maybe a few changes in our arguments, as there isn't much I haven't covered. An entirely new debate would just be white noise.
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
Correct link for source 3: http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
Correct link for source 2: http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
We'll have to wait for his R2 to see if he's actually a troll or not.
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
@Subutai, you're right, I think we'll have a redo and start a new debate. Everyone makes mistakes. Now, I have to face this dumb troll. I thought I set the criteria to as good or better than me. Oh well, more points for me.
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
@Magic8000, TBH I'm not pissed, I just want to prove that I should have won my debate against Subutai because he unintentionally plagiarized. Remember I didn't call him any names or call him a notorious plagiarizer, I said it was probably and accident. A pissed person would be like: Subutai is notorious ******* plagiarizer and I should have won. However, I realize people make mistake mistakes. Nevertheless, I should have won.
No votes have been placed for this debate.