Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

If someone plagiarized a round word for word

cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 12:21:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 12:20:05 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It is reasonable that they should still get argument points and win the debate?

that a tough one but yeah because there isn't anything about plagiarism in the scoring
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 12:25:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 12:21:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 6/22/2013 12:20:05 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It is reasonable that they should still get argument points and win the debate?

that a tough one but yeah because there isn't anything about plagiarism in the scoring

What about if there was a "full 7 points concession" rule for plagiarizing that was uncontested?

http://www.debate.org...

I just had a debate on the debate above:

http://www.debate.org...

I am loosing the debate. However, I still feel I am right.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 1:20:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The purpose of debating is to persuasively present your own case in order to edify on an issue. Therefore, you lose if you're not persuasive. Similarly, you ought to lose if you do not present your own case, or if you do not edify on an issue (a lot of rhetorical devices that sound nice but no actual case or anything learnt means you ought to lose as well). Therefore, plagiarism, or not presenting your own case, is losing.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 1:24:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Plagiarism in and of itself only justifies the loss of a conduct point, but if it's used as a substitute for original material (as I'm guessing was the case), then all points are forfeited.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 1:32:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 1:20:31 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
The purpose of debating is to persuasively present your own case in order to edify on an issue. Therefore, you lose if you're not persuasive. Similarly, you ought to lose if you do not present your own case, or if you do not edify on an issue (a lot of rhetorical devices that sound nice but no actual case or anything learnt means you ought to lose as well). Therefore, plagiarism, or not presenting your own case, is losing.

Will you vote on the debate we had about you?
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 1:43:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think you're generally right. But you should also remember this:

Con broke the rules, himself, by posting rules. If Con had instigated this debate, I think you could have made a stronger case (and I don't think Larz addressed this sufficiently in his debate, however, your resolution hamstrung you on your debate with him more than what problems with his argument that I saw).

The first rule was for acceptance, not for acceptance and rules. Plagiarism should CERTAINLY count for the conduct point, and I think stronger than "inserting your own rules AFTER you've accepted the debate", however, that debate was a bit of a mess. SH should have put in at least some rebuttal (no offense SH). The first point made by his opponent was one that's incredibly trivial to rebut, so it's not as though we have a plagiarized gish gallop here; it's a foolish and stupid argument, and could have been demolished in but a few sentences. Pro's second argument, likewise, was a terrible one, and he tried to claim that the argument stands unless it's wholly negated, when in point of fact if was he who had the burden of demonstrating the premises as TRUE and if they were called into question, they would not stand.

I happen to disagree with Larz's interpretation, but I don't think I can call it not "reasonably justified".
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 1:59:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
A full round of plagiarized material should be a full concession and a loss of all 7 points.

For one, plagiarism should not be taken lightly. It is illegal.
It also takes someone else's work and knowledge and presents it as your own.

Debate is for presenting your own original arguments and then you can use other sources to back yourself up. Copying and pasting something isn't debating.

Your basically saying that if there are no rules against plagiarism posted in the OP then I can just copy/paste some high grade scientific material and then while my opponent is struggling to refute the arguments I only lose one point while he gets to lose three. Especially if the opponent calls out plagiarism and doesn't attempt to argue against it.

Yup, seems fair.
Nolite Timere
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 2:02:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 1:59:43 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
A full round of plagiarized material should be a full concession and a loss of all 7 points.

Exactly! This is what I argued in my debate with Larz. If someone can win a debate by cheating, then debating on this website is fruitless. What is the point of testing each others debating skills, if you can just cheat and win?


For one, plagiarism should not be taken lightly. It is illegal.
It also takes someone else's work and knowledge and presents it as your own.

Debate is for presenting your own original arguments and then you can use other sources to back yourself up. Copying and pasting something isn't debating.

Your basically saying that if there are no rules against plagiarism posted in the OP then I can just copy/paste some high grade scientific material and then while my opponent is struggling to refute the arguments I only lose one point while he gets to lose three. Especially if the opponent calls out plagiarism and doesn't attempt to argue against it.

Yup, seems fair.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 2:02:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 1:43:33 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I think you're generally right. But you should also remember this:

Con broke the rules, himself, by posting rules. If Con had instigated this debate, I think you could have made a stronger case (and I don't think Larz addressed this sufficiently in his debate, however, your resolution hamstrung you on your debate with him more than what problems with his argument that I saw).

The first rule was for acceptance, not for acceptance and rules. Plagiarism should CERTAINLY count for the conduct point, and I think stronger than "inserting your own rules AFTER you've accepted the debate", however, that debate was a bit of a mess. SH should have put in at least some rebuttal (no offense SH). The first point made by his opponent was one that's incredibly trivial to rebut, so it's not as though we have a plagiarized gish gallop here; it's a foolish and stupid argument, and could have been demolished in but a few sentences. Pro's second argument, likewise, was a terrible one, and he tried to claim that the argument stands unless it's wholly negated, when in point of fact if was he who had the burden of demonstrating the premises as TRUE and if they were called into question, they would not stand.

In official debates, plagiarism is justification for Silent Disqualification (which is the harshest form). Calling someone out on plagiarism gives one the right in almost all competitions either a pass through that round as a win, or a win and removal of cost, because of how insulting it is. It would be the equivalent of paying for a football match, and being given a video tape of it. In all situations, I refuse to debate with someone who wholly plagiarises arguments. Most clearly this is wrong when he did not even read my argument case: in R2 I called him a cheater and fraud, yet in R3 he did not even acknowledge it, I venture to say because he did not even read what I posted but instead had stock to spew out and regurgitate.

That said, I do not resent larz for voting the way he did. I respect him as a fellow actual debater who understands the rules of tournaments and I am sure has done judging before, and understands as well as I do the difficulty in judging. I believe he is "wrong" in how he considers plagiarism in a debate - I think he treats it too leniently - but I believe he is wrong in the same form of debate about whether a piece of art is beautiful, or whether Arsenal is a good football team. It ultimately comes down to your own take on it.

Moreover, I have always believed it is common etiquette to never say whether a judge is right or wrong, or say whether you ought to have won or lost, a debate where you took part in. I have my own opinions on what happen in each of my debates and each contention how it went and how to improve, but I try to never make a "win/loss" claim on my own debates. Therefore, I'm not going to claim it was unjustified, even if I thought it was. So I am not going to vote on the evaluation of a decision of a judge.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 2:03:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
However, I will say this statement worried me:

"Copying from one person is plagiarism, copying from many is called research"

If KanzulHuda ever becomes a scholar, they'd better have good plagiarism detectors.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 3:39:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 1:20:31 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
The purpose of debating is to persuasively present your own case in order to edify on an issue. Therefore, you lose if you're not persuasive. Similarly, you ought to lose if you do not present your own case, or if you do not edify on an issue (a lot of rhetorical devices that sound nice but no actual case or anything learnt means you ought to lose as well). Therefore, plagiarism, or not presenting your own case, is losing.

Agree. By extension, plagiarized arguments should be dismissed. I would typically score conduct and sources against the plagiarist.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 4:22:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 1:59:43 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:


For one, plagiarism should not be taken lightly. It is illegal.

That's not entirely accurate. Copyright infringement is illegal, which often coincides with plagiarism. But plagiarism, on its own, is not inherently illegal.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 4:29:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 2:02:47 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 6/22/2013 1:43:33 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I think you're generally right. But you should also remember this:

Con broke the rules, himself, by posting rules. If Con had instigated this debate, I think you could have made a stronger case (and I don't think Larz addressed this sufficiently in his debate, however, your resolution hamstrung you on your debate with him more than what problems with his argument that I saw).

The first rule was for acceptance, not for acceptance and rules. Plagiarism should CERTAINLY count for the conduct point, and I think stronger than "inserting your own rules AFTER you've accepted the debate", however, that debate was a bit of a mess. SH should have put in at least some rebuttal (no offense SH). The first point made by his opponent was one that's incredibly trivial to rebut, so it's not as though we have a plagiarized gish gallop here; it's a foolish and stupid argument, and could have been demolished in but a few sentences. Pro's second argument, likewise, was a terrible one, and he tried to claim that the argument stands unless it's wholly negated, when in point of fact if was he who had the burden of demonstrating the premises as TRUE and if they were called into question, they would not stand.

In official debates, plagiarism is justification for Silent Disqualification (which is the harshest form). Calling someone out on plagiarism gives one the right in almost all competitions either a pass through that round as a win, or a win and removal of cost, because of how insulting it is. It would be the equivalent of paying for a football match, and being given a video tape of it. In all situations, I refuse to debate with someone who wholly plagiarises arguments. Most clearly this is wrong when he did not even read my argument case: in R2 I called him a cheater and fraud, yet in R3 he did not even acknowledge it, I venture to say because he did not even read what I posted but instead had stock to spew out and regurgitate.

That said, I do not resent larz for voting the way he did. I respect him as a fellow actual debater who understands the rules of tournaments and I am sure has done judging before, and understands as well as I do the difficulty in judging. I believe he is "wrong" in how he considers plagiarism in a debate - I think he treats it too leniently - but I believe he is wrong in the same form of debate about whether a piece of art is beautiful, or whether Arsenal is a good football team. It ultimately comes down to your own take on it.

Moreover, I have always believed it is common etiquette to never say whether a judge is right or wrong, or say whether you ought to have won or lost, a debate where you took part in. I have my own opinions on what happen in each of my debates and each contention how it went and how to improve, but I try to never make a "win/loss" claim on my own debates. Therefore, I'm not going to claim it was unjustified, even if I thought it was. So I am not going to vote on the evaluation of a decision of a judge.

I don't really fault you. I suppose, for clarity, I should have said "In order to achieve a sweeping victory without much reasonable dissent, SH should have...", rather than simply saying what you should have done. The debate voting went exactly as I'd expect it to given the circumstances; you won, but at the same time some people took issue with your response to the plagiarism, which made it closer than it would have otherwise been.

I disagree with Larz' opinion, and, had I voted, probably would have given you a full 7 due to the egregious conduct on the other side (I award sources and S&G in addition to arguments and conduct in the case of plagiarism this egregious because you can't get credit for sourcing you don't do, neither can you get S&G for things you didn't write) . But I can respect his opinion on the matter, and I can't say it's an "unreasonable" one, simply one with which I strongly disagree.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 6:32:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 12:20:05 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It is reasonable that they should still get argument points and win the debate?

Absolutely not.

At 6/22/2013 12:21:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
that a tough one but yeah because there isn't anything about plagiarism in the scoring

Not tough at all. If the argument is plagiarized, the votes have to go either to the other debater or to the person the argument was stolen from. They cannot go to the person who stole them.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2013 6:57:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/22/2013 6:32:12 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 6/22/2013 12:20:05 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It is reasonable that they should still get argument points and win the debate?

Absolutely not.

I agree, for some reason, the people who voted in the debate for Larz (http://www.debate.org...) completely ignored my argument that his kind of vote for somebody who steals work word for word endorses plagiarism. That is not reasonable on a website that is supposed to be centered in honest debating.


At 6/22/2013 12:21:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
that a tough one but yeah because there isn't anything about plagiarism in the scoring

Not tough at all. If the argument is plagiarized, the votes have to go either to the other debater or to the person the argument was stolen from. They cannot go to the person who stole them.