User talk:Bootmii/Conservapedia:Blatant plagiarism/Morality

That's ironic, that is.

What can I say? When your article on morality is stolen from elsewhere, well, it just says it all. --Horace 05:30, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

Edit summary from Morality article on CP:

Revision as of 09:19, 31 March 2007 (edit) (undo)
TK (Talk | contribs)
m (Protected "Morality": Please stop reverting articles in the middle of composition [edit=sysop:move=sysop])
Next diff →

ɱ@δ ɱ!ɳ^Hello?/_{I did this!} 06:11, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

Ah, but another section now copies with permission! From "Morality and the law": "This section copies, with permission, material in the Proceedings of the Friesian School, available here" (Added by ANDY). And hey, it just took them TWO MONTHS to ask for that permission!

This also showcases that the first CP Commandment is... wrong: "Do not copy from Wikipedia or elsewhere unless it was your original work." Yeah, uh, whatever. Copying is okay! If you're caught, either transform it into an ugly blockquote or ask for permission later on. --Sid 07:55, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

I totally missed the implication: Andrew Schlafly finally acknowledges that the article copied from more than one source! In my entire time at CP, I couldn't make him acknowledge that! --Sid 08:00, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

I'm going to sprain my irony muscle watching these goofballs. --Kels 08:01, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

I particularly liked the use of the word composition. ɱ@δ ɱ!ɳ^Hello?/_{I did this!} 08:08, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

I have reason to believe Andy got email from the copyright holder of that section. The work in question has an extremely liberal license -- they never needed to ask for permission, they just had to give attribution and link to the original page. Oh, and look at the edit history again -- they first Andy "fix" still didn't acknowledge the actual copying. --jtl^talk 11:14, 29 May 2007 (CDT)