Like we mentioned, the Medium article is only a surrogate of the original publication, which hasn't been shared publicly yet. We are big fans of the paper mentioned and references will be clear (and due) on the final publication. We never meant to elude plagiarism detectors by employing the writing style you see throughout the Medium article. Again, we acknowledge that some parts are very similar to the document you mention as a reference, the scope of which is to describe the mathematical properties of various existing AMM algorithms. Haptic is about reducing the impact of impermanent loss, and we produced plenty of original content and smart contract code. Our Twitter account exists since a while, but the project was conceived last summer and we started developing it under the #L222 mentorship program,during January 2022.
[...]
Allow me to also quote the sentence referred as "like we mentioned" to give a clear picture
Our Medium launch article is a shortened version of our upcoming whitepaper, which is heavily influenced by the academic literature and references it properly.
To make it clear, you're saying that the content of your medium will be on your final WP as well... or in other words, the content that exactly plagiarize content from the paper referenced above will be on your whitepaper?
In addition, here is a report from Grammarly.com:
Anything less than 15% is within perfectly reasonable usage. If you want to insist with your narrative, go ahead.
I am not a paid member of grammarly, so the plagiarism checker is rather inaccessible for me. If any, the result I got actually works against your favor as grammarly --the plagiarism checker you prefer to defend yourself-- define your document as "significantly plagiarized"
But please amuse us, if we have to go your way, does the 8% detected includes the parts that you've tailored to make a slight difference --i.e.: the word "2020" to "2021", or removing two or three words in several sentences-- or you've been kind and fair enough to re-adjust those tailored parts to match the corresponding parts on the original document? Please note that when I said "tailored" it doesn't mean you paraphrasing them by taking the essence of the paragraph and sentences and turn them into your own, you rather --as I said previously-- selectively redacted one or two sentences, or if we may borrow
tbct_mt2's words, a
fake paraphrasing.
I somewhat think the percentage will be much higher than 8%.
Although... in the other hand, it does not really matters. If you deemed copying something from someone else by a reason --you type and I quote-- "
Anything less than 15% is within perfectly reasonable usage.", I think you're in a serious need to run a course on business ethic. I would also suggest you to familiarize with the list of forum's unofficial-official rules, I've nicely selected and highlighted some of them which specifically talking about plagiarism:
[...]
These are the most common rule violations that newbies make. There are other rules than these.
- Plagiarism: If you copy some text from somewhere, then you should have a good reason for it, and you must link to the source. Doing otherwise is plagiarism. Changing a few words around doesn't matter. If we find that you plagiarized, then you absolutely will be permanently banned, even if we find it years after you did it.
[...]
insight on plagiarism:
In general, I'm all for being lenient. There are users who have been temp banned many times but still haven't been permabanned because their contributions outweigh their misbehavior. I
actively disbelieve in the idea of a "rule of law" where hard rules exist and are strictly applied across the board as if we're all robots. Every case should be considered individually in the context of the forum's mission.
Plagiarism is what gets people permabanned, not just copying. Plagiarism is copying with the intent of passing the work off as your own. In essentially all cases, plagiarism deserves a permaban because it usually proves definitively that the person is here for the wrong reasons: to fill up space in order to get paid, not to actually discuss or contribute. If someone was able to convince us that they were plagiarizing just to eg.
impress people rather than to fill up space, then a lesser ban of a few months might instead be warranted. But this has never happened AFAICR. (Arguments based on plausible deniability aren't going to work; we don't need to
prove that you had the motive we see in your actions.)
If you treat posting as a job, a chore, then you must live in fear, since the forum is not made for you. In this case, you need to blend in as someone who actually cares, but plagiarism will immediately out you, and producing a mountain of useless posts will also eventually be noticed, if more slowly. If you do actually care, then this will be obvious in your posts (and probably your merit score), and you will have nothing to fear from moderators; even allegations of plagiarism will be doubted when seen in the context of your other posts.
in extreme cases could be copyright theft?
Plagiarism is almost always a copyright violation which could conceivably get the poster in a lot of trouble, but it's not a bigger legal issue
for the forum than anything else. (Using the forum to violate copyright is never allowed, though.)
when copying and pasting from the net can it lower google rankings? and internal copy and past could do the same thing?
That's not a particular concern of mine.
even memes may soon constitute copyright theft
Only in the EUSSR.
Or, if we want to go somewhere more worldwidely accepted, the Merriam-Webster's definition of plagiarism
Definition of plagiarize
transitive verb
: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
intransitive verb
: to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
If your intention is truly just to make a summary of a more complex document --which, in it, also includes the content on the summary, i.e. the plagiarized content-- I can't see why can't you cite the source on medium. You literally just need to add a sentence stating this on the lower part of your article. For me, this action is more to a caught-red-handedly copying a material than submitting a paper that's heavily influenced and inspired by a document you've been a big fan of.
Talking about WP... this is a separate topic yet related to your case. Long story short, upon submitting this accusation thread, a little bird (if we may call a reputable member of this forum as a "little bird") tipped me to look at a project called
"Elysian Finance" who openly admitted that they share the same dev as your project. Interestingly, this project were once
violated forum rules too, just like you violate the plagiarizing rule. On their case, it seems they tried to incentivizing post. And, just like you, they also decide --and somehow seemingly rather proud of-- to be anonymous as well as having a bare minimum website.
Now, for the WP, they promised to deliver a WP "some time later". True to their words, they took "later" rather seriously as it's been more than one and a half months and they are yet to deliver the document, and it is worth mentioning that their fair launch is in... two weeks! Oh dear Lucifer, it almost seems like they're not planning to give anyone adequate time to read and do research on their WP before the launch. Red flag. Red flag. Anon team? Also red flag. Shared the same team with a project that plagiarize document? Umm... black flag?
Funnily, they later removed this self confessions through edit
