Flintlock76 Overmod Chicago Manual of Style The WHAT? Sounds a bit uppity coming from people who don't know how to make a decent pizza, or hot dog for that matter! You want real pizza and hot dogs? Take a ride with "The Boss." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRXhDQXhdXE Brings tears to my eyes every time I hear it, and that's no joke!
Overmod Chicago Manual of Style
The WHAT?
Sounds a bit uppity coming from people who don't know how to make a decent pizza, or hot dog for that matter!
You want real pizza and hot dogs? Take a ride with "The Boss."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRXhDQXhdXE
Brings tears to my eyes every time I hear it, and that's no joke!
I can't lie I'm partial to Chicago style pizza. Just one of those modifications that can easily satisfy this Midwesterner
Lithonia Operator I actually own a physical copy of the Chicago Manual of Style. It's thick. All it takes is reading a few pages before one decides to wait for the movie.
I actually own a physical copy of the Chicago Manual of Style. It's thick. All it takes is reading a few pages before one decides to wait for the movie.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Lithonia Operator Within a few posts I suggested a few different possible scenarios, and here's another: Colin put the post up. Then he decided to submitted the piece to the magazine. The magazine accepted it. Colin independently decided that it would probably be appropriate to then take the post down, and he did. And Kalmbach never saw the post. This could easily be the case. I did not wish to counter the very polite and informative SD60MAC9500, but the fact is, Colin's putting up (and I paraphrase) the "I removed it, stay tuned" notice in no way proves that Kalmbach had seen the post. There are several possible scenarios.
Within a few posts I suggested a few different possible scenarios, and here's another: Colin put the post up. Then he decided to submitted the piece to the magazine. The magazine accepted it. Colin independently decided that it would probably be appropriate to then take the post down, and he did. And Kalmbach never saw the post. This could easily be the case. I did not wish to counter the very polite and informative SD60MAC9500, but the fact is, Colin's putting up (and I paraphrase) the "I removed it, stay tuned" notice in no way proves that Kalmbach had seen the post. There are several possible scenarios.
Any and all objections are welcome. I say Trains knew due to a thread I posted some months back that was not a railroad related topic. I wanted to test the sites mod enforcement, and see if they do check here from time to time. I created a thread called: The future of deglobalization, and it's impact on the economy. Or something along that line.. I wrote a paragraph on what I presume to be events going forward. Along with how they might change nation dynamics when it comes to trade. The thread was deleted from the GD forum within 10 mins of posting it. Which gave me all the info I needed to know about moderation on the forum and rule enforcement. Hence why I say someone from Trains scanned the forum and came across Northwest 2048 vision and thought it was a good piece to put in a future column. Of course this is just my opinion.
That's as plausible a scenario as most others.
Interesting about your covert test. You rascal, you.
Do you get Trains? Maybe they took your post down so they could publish it the magazine. Check back issues.
Sticking to the topic, I seriously doubt if we will hear anything more from Colin on here, if we ever did.
Lithonia Operator That's as plausible a scenario as most others. Interesting about your covert test. You rascal, you. Do you get Trains? Maybe they took your post down so they could publish it the magazine. Check back issues.
One thing in life I learned sometimes you gotta push limits to understand your limits. Yes I get the digital version. That would be funny if they did.
charlie hebdo Sticking to the topic, I seriously doubt if we will hear anything more from Colin on here, if we ever did.
I agree.
Lithonia Operator wrote
Peter, do you have inside info that Trains asked for the name change to get to an even of 20 years? Or are you just assuming that? (It does seem to be a good assumption, and nothing nefarious.)
It was an assumption on my part based on the titles of the other articles in that Issue of Trains. There was an article on the SD40 and derivatives (based only on the number 40) although clearly it was a very significant locomotive from the period, it could be argued that the U25 was more significant (but it didn't match the numeric pattern).
Looking at the contents page, the articles are:
20 page 12
40 page 20
80 for 80 page 30
Railroading in 2040 page 36
(That looks like a pattern to me...)
Colin has always referred to his post being dated 2048. His Australian version was dated 2050 (It could equally have been 2040 - we aren't always two years behind here)
In Australia, nobody believed that there would be a man on the locomotive in twenty years' time given current operations.
Peter
Lithonia Operator charlie hebdo Sticking to the topic, I seriously doubt if we will hear anything more from Colin on here, if we ever did. I agree.
Reminds me of a storefront on a layout showcased by MR ca 1970: Linn's Archive of Ancient and Altered Manuscripts. Linn being Linn Wescott who was the editor of MR at the time.
M636C Lithonia Operator wrote Peter, do you have inside info that Trains asked for the name change to get to an even of 20 years? Or are you just assuming that? (It does seem to be a good assumption, and nothing nefarious.) It was an assumption on my part based on the titles of the other articles in that Issue of Trains. There was an article on the SD40 and derivatives (based only on the number 40) although clearly it was a very significant locomotive from the period, it could be argued that the U25 was more significant (but it didn't match the numeric pattern). Looking at the contents page, the articles are: 20 page 12 40 page 20 80 for 80 page 30 Railroading in 2040 page 36 (That looks like a pattern to me...) Colin has always referred to his post being dated 2048. His Australian version was dated 2050 (It could equally have been 2040 - we aren't always two years behind here) In Australia, nobody believed that there would be a man on the locomotive in twenty years' time given current operations. Peter
Thanks, man. I had no idea you were in Australia!
Really, seeing now what you've shown re the numbers, I'm more than willing to bet that's exactly what happened. Good analysis.
So the Aussies all felt there would be zero human crew by then?
M636C Lithonia Operator charlie hebdo Sticking to the topic, I seriously doubt if we will hear anything more from Colin on here, if we ever did. I agree. Colin has been a consistent poster on these forums for several years, so he must have started at a relatively young age. The posts have generally been on locomotive related matters. I'm not sure that losing him, particularly if, as I've suggested elsewhere, there were changes made to his article that made it appear to be more derivative than it was, will be a benefit to the forums. Recently I had an article published on the former SP SD40s operating on the BHP iron ore line from Port Hedland in Western Australia. I'd written the article nine years ago and forgotten it. The article was sent to me for approval just before press time and I insisted on a number of significant changes. Why? All the locomotives had been scrapped in 2014, well after I had written the article. I had a similar experience with a different article (on a 1912 Consolidation type) for a different magazine, published eight years after submission. It is lucky that my e-mail address has remained the same for so long... But trust me, the editor can change an article until it is unrecognisable to the author and I feel that this is not realised by many who post here. Peter
I hear you.
Often when articles are cut (and most stories I've had published were shortened, some quite substantially), things can get really skewed.
I can't remember now what the scenario was, but once a paragraph of mine was edited down so much that the main point of it completely vanished, and what was left almost seemed to be making the opposite point. It was one of the first times I got published, and I can still remember how disappointed and frustrated I felt.
I sure hope this gets settled to the satisfaction of Don, and that there were only honest mistakes made.
IIRC, I've had some pleasant interactions with Northwest on this board, and I hope he's not feeling kicked in the gut if in fact this resulted from honest misunderstandings.
Heard back from Jim Wrinn. Most likely going to put a blurb in the next magazine issue saying Colin's article was inspired by my blog.
I'm satisfied with that. I hope Colin is sadder, but wiser and keeps writing!
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I'm glad you're satisfied with that, Don. You're taking the high road and that is to be commended.
oltmannd Heard back from Jim Wrinn. Most likely going to put a blurb in the next magazine issue saying Colin's article was inspired by my blog. I'm satisfied with that. I hope Colin is sadder, but wiser and keeps writing!
By the sound of all the discussion here, I thought Collin must have duplicated word for word, what you had previously written and posted.
Where is the wrong in being inspired and publishing your inspiration?
EuclidWhere is the wrong in being inspired and publishing your inspiration?
Did you not read the links I posted?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmannDid you not read the links I posted?
Hey, I've posted exactly those words to Euclid on more than one occasion. You could at least acknowledge your sources.
Convicted OneHey, I've posted exactly those words to Euclid on more than one occasion. You could at least acknowledge your sources.
A dark, shadowy figure. Might have been Darkwing Duck?
My point being. If you lock 100 monkeys in a room with 100 typewriters, eventually at least one of them will complain about plagiarism.
Convicted OneMy point being. If you lock 100 monkeys in a room with 100 typewriters, eventually at least one of them will complain about plagiarism.
I fail to see your point - and I don't think Don or Kalmbach sees it, etiher, considering the outcome of this.
I am pleased that Don is satisfied with the outcome. That is all that really matters here.
Will 2040 be the start of 'A World without people?'
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
What links? I have read a thousand definitions of plagiarism. It gets really fascinating when it comes to self-plagiarism. But I would need the two contested texts side by side to judge the crime. From the reaction, I assume that two texts were idendtical. Maybe that is what inspired the charge.
zugmann Euclid Can somebody also post the concise definition of plagiarism that would apply this this incident as it occurred in the U.S.? https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/citations/plagiarism https://style.mla.org/plagiarism-and-academic-dishonesty/ https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/what-constitutes-plagiarism
Euclid Can somebody also post the concise definition of plagiarism that would apply this this incident as it occurred in the U.S.?
https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism
https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/citations/plagiarism
https://style.mla.org/plagiarism-and-academic-dishonesty/
https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/what-constitutes-plagiarism
You can easily compare both. Don linked his blog in the first post in this thread, and the article is in the November issue.
Read the articles?!?!?
What a concept!!!!!!!
I saw Don's blog piece, but I don't have the magazine.
Euclid What links? I have read a thousand definitions of plagiarism. It gets really fascinating when it comes to self-plagiarism. But I would need the two contested texts side by side to judge the crime. From the reaction, I assume that two texts were idendtical. Maybe that is what inspired the charge.
https://uclalibrary.github.io/research-tips/workshops/avoiding-plagiarism/
All I am asking is whether inspiration can be plagiarism. I ask because the conclusion of this thread seems to be that Colin committed plagiarism by being inspired by Don’s blog.
Inspiration is the spontaneous mental reception of ideas and claiming them as your own. Plagiarism is the conscious copying of someone else’s ideas and claiming of them as your own.
When person “A” claims ideas that appear similar to ideas claimed by person “B”, how do you know weather person “A” received the ideas through plagiarism, or received them through inspiration? Or is it the crime of plagiarism either way? If the answer is yes, then that means that a person can commit plagiarism without and intention of doing so, or any awareness of having done so.
According to references I find, the answer is yes. That is that whether given ideas come to a person through their personal inspiration-or-- by copying the ideas of others, it is the wrongdoing of plagiarism either way if another person had conceived of the ideas earlier. In other words accidental, unintentional plagiarism is just as wrong as intentional plagiarism.
This would mean that ideas that come to people solely from their own consciousness are not their ideas until they research the entire history of time and space to make sure that someone else did not receive those same ideas from their own consciousness at an earlier date.
Unintended or Accidental Plagiarism:
https://secure.tlc.ontariotechu.ca/academic_integrity/module5/module52.html
Inspirational Plagiarism:
https://www.christopherfielden.com/short-story-tips-and-writing-advice/inspiration-or-plagiarism.php
The Difference between Inspiration and Plagiarism; and Dancing on the Head of a Pin:
https://dailyblogtips.com/the-difference-between-inspiration-and-plagiarism/#:~:text=How%20to%20Distinguish%20Between%20Inspiration,its%20logic%2D%20you%20are%20inspired.
EuclidThis would mean that ideas that come to people solely from their own consciousness are not their ideas until they research the entire history of time and space to make sure that someone else did not receive those same ideas from their own consciousness at an earlier date.
That is an interesting point, considering that most of what we know, we learned from others.
if I write 2+2=4 .....on one side you could say that the mathematical expression is public domain. But, if i gained that knowledge through a copyrighted source, for instance a text book, why should I not be expected to say:
2+2=4*
(* Introductory Arithmatic: Harcourt, Brace, & World 1963)
Certainly walks like a duck
Convicted One... if I write 2+2=4 on one side you could say that the mathematical expression is public domain. But, if i gained that knowledge through a copyrighted source, for instance a text book, why should I not be expected to say: 2+2=4* (* Introductory Arithmatic: Harcourt, Brace, & World 1963) Certainly walks like a duck
if I write 2+2=4 on one side you could say that the mathematical expression is public domain. But, if i gained that knowledge through a copyrighted source, for instance a text book, why should I not be expected to say:
You are not giving proper authentication to the other 2002 Arithmatic books that have been published and copyrighted with the same statements.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.