I wrote it mainly to have somewhere to point to when people come and bring up their unoriginal, rephrased, rants as an original non-fiction article.
And thanks for the support, carl. May everything you read be original!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yup and I am going to use it for that same purpose - I mentor a lot of newb curators and falling for this kind of "science posting" is an extremely common trap, it will be nice to have a resource to point them to if they genuinely care to understand the difference between "original" and "here I have rephrased entire paragraphs of my source(s) and added nothing to the conversation, but hey I added citations and sourced images from pixabay look at me aren't I clever" :) You rock per usual
Yes, especially in STEM, but even in philosophy which is more my cup of tea, this is a very common trap. We don't live in the age of information any more. (Although exceptions when you really do discover something extraordinary, do still happen, of course.)