Plagiarism | what %age should be allowed?

[zasad@]

Badmanthought makes a good point when he says it's hard to create original and new content nowadays. We see it in industries like music, movies, etc. It's the same crap with a little twist to it. But that doesn't justify stealing someone's work, putting a different title on it, and calling it a new and revolutionary coin/project.

When we are on the subject of plagiarism in whitepapers, project announcements, bounty threads, signature campaigns, etc., don't you ever get the feeling that so many of them sound the same? Especially the sections explaining the rules and posting requirements. Isn't that also some type of plagiarism and word spinning as well?

The rules originated from someone. A 2nd user made some changes and improved them, a 3rd and 4th copied from him, and so on. Now many of them look the same, just different numbers and maybe a few new requirements. I wonder who the original creator and first signature campaign manager was that made all of this?     

Why would you complicate your life and answer these questions? If someone uses someone else's material, then he should put a link to it.
Further, it doesn't matter who was the first source of this content.
I saw white papers of projects that had many links on each page. There is nothing wrong or forbidden in this.

[hugeblack]

The white paper is the idea in which you explain the basics of your project, if all copy and paste (without or with mention) the sources, the project will not develop because it will be a duplicate.

You can read the white paper for many projects and you will find that it is an explanation of the nature of the project's work and the quote is for the necessary things and not for all the points in it, and there is no need to quote because it explains how the project works in a simple way.

[UmerIdrees]

I don't know if there is already a conversation about How much percentage of plagiarism should be allowed to different projects in their Whiteperp/ litepaper or whatever they call it. I would like to initiate this topic here. As I have seen some papers got 10% plagiarism where people start calling them scammer, I think Less than 15% plagiarism should be allowed [which is allowed worldwide] as there are many cases where one can not change some terms, as if they do they'll completely change the meaning. But they also should copy someone else's paper and just remove the plagiarism, which should be strictly not allowed. What is your opinion about plagiarism and how much should be allowed in what cases?

This is more critical matter rather than just a copy paste whitepaper.  There can be two similar project based on the same idea but the white paper will be 100% unique. If anyone wants to create a project only to make quick money, they will surely try to copy the whitepaper but a professional team will never copy even a single sentence as they will have a dedicated staff who will produce 100% unique white-paper. If a project cant produce a unique white paper, i will doubt the success of this project.

[Vod]

You do not need to reference every sentence you copy from another page, but you should at least put it in quotes, and cite your sources at the end of your post.

Copying any part of another's work without compensation is theft.

[nutildah]

I think 10% is too high. The criteria for plagiarism should be based on how often 7 or more words in a row are copied from another source (it should be never). That's a fairly common standard. If there's no better way to express your thoughts than the way somebody else already has, the borrowed words need to be put in quotations and attributed to the author.

[PrimeNumber7]

I don't know if there is already a conversation about How much percentage of plagiarism should be allowed to different projects in their Whiteperp/ litepaper or whatever they call it.

In the context of whitepapers, anything that is not original research by the author(s) should be cited. This means if the author(s) used another source for a fact, they should cite it. The entire paper should be written by themselves, and anything that is copied should be quoted and cited.

By doing the above, the author(s) are transparent as to how much original research they have conducted. It is very well possible that a project could have real value with no original research if they have used many unique sources to combine several ideas together.

[LoyceV]

I think 10% is too high. The criteria for plagiarism should be based on how often 7 or more words in a row are copied from another source (it should be never).

Is that 7 word limit based on more common phrases, such as "not your keys, not your coins" or "don't invest more than you can afford to lose"? I'd say both are common enough not to need a citation anymore. I reproduce them by heart because I've read them so many times before.
It is quite likely to write the same couple of words. Google gives 2 hits for "likely to write the same", while I only searched for it after typing it. Even if the same combination of words occurs many times in a document, if 2 people write about the same subject that is to be expected.

[nutildah]

I think 10% is too high. The criteria for plagiarism should be based on how often 7 or more words in a row are copied from another source (it should be never).

Is that 7 word limit based on more common phrases, such as "not your keys, not your coins" or "don't invest more than you can afford to lose"? I'd say both are common enough not to need a citation anymore. I reproduce them by heart because I've read them so many times before.

Those phrases are so common they don't even need quotations. I don't agree with trying to bust somebody for plagiarism for usage of overtly common expressions. Are those particular examples attributable to particular sources?

Leaving out quotations when quoting less common or uncommon phrases, even when sourced at the bottom, should be discouraged.

7 words in a row max is a general guideline for unsourced quotations; 5 words is probably too strict for the purposes of the forum.

[irfan_pak10]

I think 10% is too high. The criteria for plagiarism should be based on how often 7 or more words in a row are copied from another source (it should be never).

Is that 7 word limit based on more common phrases, such as "not your keys, not your coins" or "don't invest more than you can afford to lose"? I'd say both are common enough not to need a citation anymore. I reproduce them by heart because I've read them so many times before.
It is quite likely to write the same couple of words. Google gives 2 hits for "likely to write the same", while I only searched for it after typing it. Even if the same combination of words occurs many times in a document, if 2 people write about the same subject that is to be expected.

That's why there is 10-15% plag is allowed as one can not change/edit some common and technical words/ phrases.

You do not need to reference every sentence you copy from another page, but you should at least put it in quotes, and cite your sources at the end of your post.

Copying any part of another's work without compensation is theft.

I have studied plag, If you are trying to quote someone else's work one must have to credit him and there are many ways of doing it. Depending on what you are quoting.

[nutildah]

That's why there is 10-15% plag is allowed as one can not change/edit some common and technical words/ phrases.

Let's say a post or any text is 700 words long. If the text is all original, except for 1 sentence where 7 words in a row are taken directly from another source, and that source isn't credited -- that's plagiarism. Even if its only 1% of the total words. If its a technical explanation where no words should be changed, then it needs to be quoted and sourced.

The easy way around this is to just change one of the 7 words, pretty much anywhere so long as 7 words in a row aren't the exact same. Doing this once or twice is OK. Doing it across an entire article is "text spinning," however.

[irfan_pak10]

That's why there is 10-15% plag is allowed as one can not change/edit some common and technical words/ phrases.

Let's say a post or any text is 700 words long. If the text is all original, except for 1 sentence where 7 words in a row are taken directly from another source, and that source isn't credited -- that's plagiarism. Even if its only 1% of the total words. If its a technical explanation where no words should be changed, then it needs to be quoted and sourced.

The easy way around this is to just change one of the 7 words, pretty much anywhere so long as 7 words in a row aren't the exact same. Doing this once or twice is OK. Doing it across an entire article is "text spinning," however.

Again If one is spinning the text, changing one word from seven to avoid plag, still it needs to be credited otherwise it will come under the theft category.

[nutildah]

Again If one is spinning the text, changing one word from seven to avoid plag, still it needs to be credited otherwise it will come under the theft category.

I suppose crediting it is better than not but text spinning still comes across as lazy and insincere. Though if done sparsely it doesn't come across as plagiarism.

Especially with Altcoin ANNs and white papers: I've always thought that if a project can't be bothered to describe itself using its own words, how much effort are they going to put into the actual project? The same thing goes with general posts: I'm more inclined to think a user is sincere and genuine when they express original thought.

[PrimeNumber7]

Again If one is spinning the text, changing one word from seven to avoid plag, still it needs to be credited otherwise it will come under the theft category.

I can't imagine a situation in which someone is acting in good faith and is using a text spinner to create a whitepaper.

If a whitepaper is inadvertently missing a quotation or citation, the author should promptly fix it once this is pointed out. A number of missing citations is not necessarily an indication the project is a scam. I think ultimately, good judgment needs to be used when evaluating if a project is a scam based on a whitepaper and missing citations. You can ask if the missing citations substantially change the chances of success in the eyes of a reasonable person. You can ask if the missing citations are indicative that the project is a substantial copy of another project with few substantive details changed.