|
Old Mister Crow
Join Date: May-2002
Location: Seattle, WA.
Country: USA
Posts: 3,197
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zube
Carl, I had a quick comment to make regarding the article in an online publication. In my opinion, any reason for allowing it to remain is minor. If you had a stolen car in your driveway, would you be concerned that it had 'suddenly disappeared' after the police impounded it? I would certainly think a correction/retraction would be in order, along with the removal of the offending piece. It is causing 'active harm' to the reputation of the website by it's mere presence. Perhaps a link to the original material would be appropriate.
I realize that you have no control over this, nor have I visited the site in question, but only wanted to comment on your post here.
Take care,
zube
|
Zube,
It's tricky, isn't it? These are exactly the sorts of issues we've been working through as we deal with digital publishing in the academic world. There are good arguments in both directions. I tend to place a lot of importance on creating an immutable permanent record and I like the "causing active harm" distinction -- but there are certainly good arguments in both directions.
With my best regards,
Carl
----
Ron,
I agree entirely with you about the journals. Taking this out on the editors of the journals is misdirected. It is impossible for an editor to thoroughly check every paragraph of every piece against the entire body of written human knowledge for any possible evidence of plagiarism. Thus these sorts of things happen to the big publishers, to the academic publishers, and in magazines such as those we are discussing. As you say, the important thing is how the editors choose to handle the event.
With my best regards,
Carl |