Shaun said:
I had very strong suspicions from the start, but of course had to confirm. strong as suspicions are, always give someone a chance.. benefit of the doubt. So I confirmed and here we are. Confirmed in order to move onto giving credit. This is the first time anywhere I've seen exemption from giving credit.
Think we have gone through this. Don't bother giving me the benefit of doubt, or pretend to exhibit sympathy. You have dug what you need to, and my advice is - move on - unless you need to prove more to fulfil your ego. To which I feel, you pick the wrong person to prove. Go swim in the bigger ocean to prove yourself, not amongst the longkang ikan bilis like me.
Shaun said:
if the asking for an acknowledgement of sources is considered antagonizing, then it is a sad state that local forums have dropped to. If not putting up with a member who cheats you and your best friend of thousands of dollars, who sulks about not getting to profit from a tech project, if telling people not to post dirty jokes on your forum, if clinging to a technical truth backed up by physics, if calling out an outrageous laptime... if all this is antagonistic then ok.
So you have been patrolling all the local forums, or is that a sweeping statement? Both you and I know which are the forums which had banned your postings, and that's a FACT. In my firmest belief, it is neither your character nor your integrity that warrants such sanctions.
It is your attitude.
Noble as you think you can be, it is what the major body think about you. Perception is rampant and irrational at times, but if you truly belongs, then stick to it. Perhaps the local forums could not accommodate your tactless attitude?
An honest advice: why do you not wanna reflect upon yourself, but instead chose to point all those fingers on your two hands at others?
Shaun said:
You can rag on my character, or color 'history' all you want, and I can defend myself. But why bother? Those who do not know us personally will be unable to make a remotely certain judgement for themselves. The best they will have to go by is how we shown ourselves to be by our actions and words. The difference here is you are trying to put my character down, whilst I am not trying to do that to you. I only pointed out that you do not have firm grasp of the quoted concepts and that credit should be given. I also maintain that what you did might or might not have been intentionally done. There is no attack on your character, just the explanation of the logic that I am basing the lack of grasp which you have now admitted to, and now the possible reasons for the lack of acknowledgement.
I'd think everyone could see what you are trying to do here. The responses speak volume for themselves.
BTW, I am not tainting your character.
Just your attitude.
Drill that into your mind. It is your attitude.
Shaun said:
I have not labelled you plagiarizer, liar, or anything like that. I leave it free. You could have just said "oh yah I forgot to give credit" and we'd have been back to deciding between tulips and roses by now.
I have just given you the credit of exposing my technical shortcomings. You were successful in doing so, so why be so humble about it? You were short of labelling me one - which I am, but don't give a shit since I am not in academia.
Now, if I have misled with wrong info, I will be cruxified by you by virtue of your database within your skull. But I have (merely) plagiarised. Sorry, Professor, there goes my credit.
Lest you wanna run me over twice with your 400-bhp VW, or turn around and shoot my corpse again and again for cheap thrill, I'd suggest you rest the matter.
I am not entertaining your GM questions, but will leave it free for the rest of the participants to see for themselves if they think your ideas are original.
And the Spiderman thingy...... never mind.