kenntona said:
Last night I was watching an episode of safari wildlife on the Discovery Channel. A pack of hyenas was trailing their injured prey, waiting for the prey to slip or weaken. They pounced and feasted on the dying prey. Some younger hyenas hopped around with chunks of meat, apparently exhibiting their victory over what was a weak sure-hunt. For the young hyenas, this is crucial in building up their confidence in the harsh African environment. In fact, this act is part of their growing up process, especially in horning their hunting skills and establishing themselves within their groups. Perhaps that’s the reason why hyenas – even when they are fully grown - are never respected as a gutsy or fearless predator. They will never be reckoned or respected to be the king of the safari, unlike the mighty lion.
Mighty interesting, plus it suits this folder title in terms of being irrelevant
I'm sorry you have to react this way just because you dislike having been caught not acknowledging the work of others.
BTW, the word you are looking for is honing, not 'horning'.
“Trade the favour of hundred for the respect of the few who value truth” – are these alternatives binary and mutually exclusive? You’d mean to imply that those who desire favours from the majority do not value truth?
You infer too far lah. What is often the case, has not been claimed to be the only case. Read carefully!
Or is your individual paradigm structured as such that you could not deliver truth in such a way that the hundreds could respect?
I could not deliver truth in such a way that people who claim to do something but who do not do it, can accept. Same goes for people who are weak and insecure, or people who do not like being corrected despite being wrong - like this attempted kickback from you just because you have been caught quoting someone else's hard work without giving him/her credit for it.
Surely, if your deliverance of universal truth is valid, aligned and peppered with “good intention” and “clear conscience, ” it would not have resulted in your numerous failed attempts in enlightening other forumers.
The truth is the truth, how it is delivered might or might not be liked.. depending on who is listening, but like I said I don't care. The hateful and jealous count the failures. Those hungry for progress count the successes. Despite all the gossip you hear and speak, you do not know me. You do not know my successes. You do not know my true friends.
I could not quite believe that your noble efforts, to your credits, have resulted in those forum sanctions. Perhaps it is the channel of delivery that is causing the resounding resistance to your “subjective balance”? Something for you to ponder upon.
We can sit here and you can say perhaps this, perhaps that. I can reply with a "ah! but perhaps THIS.. or perhaps THAT!" Who really though? What we know HAS happened (no uncertainty, no perhaps, nothing) is that you have been discovered to be taking someone else's work and using it without giving credit to the person. Right here, right now, the proof is before us - undeleted, unhidden, unedited.
If you are to further propose this or that about ME, who you do not know except though the gossip of weak minds and characters, then I invite you to post the evidence. Post the links to the threads so we can discuss the specifics. No specifics, no talk. All this lack of specificity is weak and I believe, a big smokescreen.
But surely, a casual answer to a Grudge Match question between few regular players need not be intepreted as an exaggerated manipulation of that principle.
This folder is open, not closed. Even among just friends, why risk having them believe that you know something that you actually don't? It's just all about honesty and transparent. Some people like that in friends.
Had there been any disrespect for any principle of sorts here, I’d believe I would have be banned by the moderators here. So if that is fine with the moderators, I could not comprehend your admonishing enforcement on my answer.
If they did not realize the depth of the subject you spoke of, they would not suspect plagiarism. Now that I have asked you about it and this has gotten less than pleasant, they are reluctant to say anything because it may be seen as taking sides. Things like these almost inevitably get personal. No one wants part of this mess. As it is right now, you cannot rightly say that they are fine with it. You may ask them and they may tell you something that will keep the peace.
Certainly this is not warranted for, as it is the most effective approach to kill the fun and the party here. With this system of policing, who will dare to answer questions such as “SMG or DSG” or “TC or SC”? To a certain degree, your desire for factual validation is killing the game with that sharp attitude of truth seeker.
There are so many productive technical threads I could point out to you. Logic and math/physics has been introduced to support the various ideas and the result has been good. Look at the recent ADSM Supercharger thread. Is there anything damning about it?
I don't see how SMG or DSG or TC or SC is a game. People really want to know, so why not give them something instead of just floundering around in a sea of misinformation and la-di-la jokes?
For heaven’s sake, this is a Grudge Match – we are having fun here - hello? Not trying to make a point, prove ourselves, exchanging knowledge on modding, and certainly not trying to influence or mis-inform the rest of forumers, are we?
You may or may not have been trying, but I don't know which and don't claim to know. In any case, as mentioned in a previous paragraphwhy leave the option open? Just seal it and acknowledge. It take 10 seconds to type out a name.
The forum would have been a blackhole for fun if your are running it.
And if you were running it, a blackhole for proper, unplagiarized information.
Do you not think that this whole “inline 6 versus V6” thingy has been blown out of proportion by your adamant attitude in finding out the truth, giving credit to its source, and in the mean time try to justify your action when your intention and goodwill does not make any sense at all?
No leh, I see it as your going all over the place and not simply sticking the point. Like I said, a simple "oh I forgot to mention who/where I got that from" would be all that was needed to avoid all this. Instead you chose to attempt to justify it and start your wonderful analysis about me, conjecture about history you do not know firsthand, and hilarious analogies.
It will be easier for the me to accept your actions if you are conceding a personal vendetta against me. It will then be a personal issue, which should not have been a taint in any part of the forum.
There has been no one else that has plagiarized... or at least none that I've seen. No one has spoke of any concept as high up as your bank angles and primary/seconday shakes. I saw it, I called it, that is all. If you have any proof that I singled you out of a group, please show it. Plesae show someone else's potential plagiarism on this forum that I have left untouched.
BTW, I once spoke to a friend of mine on the subject of plagiarism about 3 months ago. There was example on another forum that was 100% clear (source and copy), but I was not able to comment because I did not have access to that forum. The friend I spoke to about this participates on this forum as well and I hope that if he sees this thread and if it is not too much trouble for him, he will post and verify that I did in fact mention to him how much I detest it - way before the incident on this thread began.
Just a last thought. Very often, human beings rationalise their actions in a way they seemed logical, fit, and justified. Yet the truth is often quite the opposite if the judgement of objectivity is casted on their actions. Even the legal system do not look at issues as black or white. So is life. Not everything is about black or white, right or wrong, and truth or lie. This is best summed up by a script in a 1949 movie "Adam's Rib":
“Law, like man, is composed of two parts. Just as man is body and soul, so is the law letter and spirit. The law says, 'Thou shalt not kill.' Yet men have killed and proved a reason and been set free. Self-defense - defense of others, of wife, of children and home. If a thief breaks into your house and you shoot him, the law will not deal harshly with you. Nor, indeed should it. So here you are asked to judge not whether or not these acts were committed, but to what extent they were justified.”
Learn to look at life and all the intricacies of life in a different tint of shade. Be firm and do not compromise when absolute truth is needed, but else stay merry and jovious. Take a path on the lighter side of life.
And remember that in any community – virtual or reality, it is not the judicial enforcement that makes quality living and healthy social interaction. It is the spirit and camaraderie. It is the human touch factor, not cold raw facts and data that distincts us – flesh and blood – from high-powered processing machines.
Glad you acknowledged Adam's Rib
It is absolutely true, but there is nothing wrong with spirit and camaraderie on a higher level. A level where accuracy, honesty, are held higher. This is not dealing with life and death, painful punishments, or taking years of a man's life. It is merely about taking the time to acknowledge someone's work. I still find it incredibly puzzling how worldwide, communities of such quality exist on a large bias towards tech, yet for some unknown reason, we SGers cannot work one out.
And I am pretty impressed by your statement "Racing is my life. At the same time, I realize there is life beyond racing." At least, you do know that there is life beyond cars.
My best friends know that I know that. From years ago we have talked seriously about a lot of other things. You do not know it, but racing, while high on my priority list, is not number one.
If you notice, I acknowledge Tony Kanaan in bold for speaking those powerful words.