as community members, we have the responsibility to make sure that the powers-that-be act in accordance to the guidelines they set forward. they should not be allowed to act in a random way, nor to act unethically, nor to act against their own stated policies. so first, because slashdot accepts forbes submissions in other topics the board, even within the week, why did they randomly decide to not accept this particular one? and further, why did they decide to sneakily substitute a different URL -- thereby plagiarising my name, and my words, and erroneously implying that i endorsed that inferior submission, instead of creating a new submission of their own? why did they sneak in to the database yesterday and silently change their substituted URL to the forbes "welcome" page when that was NOT the URL i submitted, either? why not change the database BACK to the actual URL that i submitted and apologise for their misbehaviour, especially since i added the expunged URL to an upthread comment where it was easily seen? oh, and don't forget, but the editors should tell me, SHOULD TELL US ALL, publicly, why did they delete my message that i posted here, in this very thread, yesterday? as slashdot states at the beginning of each story's comments: "The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way." that statement implies that the editors will neither edit nor delete any comments, yet they CLEARLY DO -- when the comments displease them by, say, calling them out for their lack of transparency and for their misbehaviour. and, as a community member who would like to be part of a reputable site, why am i supposed to "shut up" -- as one commenter told me to do upthread -- when i notice these egregious discrepancies, when i have done absolutely nothing wrong by commenting publicly upon them? oh, and one last thing -- this is just for the editors at slashdot: i've taken a screenshot of this comment and will happily repost it if you decide to sneakily delete it as you did with yesterday's comment.
but the point is that I DID NOT POST THAT LINK. my words were stolen to promote a poorly written substitute to the story that i quoted and that i intended to share. if the plagiarist wanted to promote a different story, then that person should never have used MY NAME nor MY WORDS to do so. this bait-and-switch plagiarism should not be allowed to stand on this, or any, reputable site.
FYI: here's the link to the story that i shared: http://www.forbes.com/sites/gr...
i am sure you'll agree that the piece i shared is far superior to the bait-and-switched australian geographic story.
i did not submit that link. my headline and my words were stolen and the original link to the story i submitted -- http://www.forbes.com/sites/gr... -- was replaced with the australian geographic link. honestly, the australian geographic story pales compared to the story that i shared.
Ah, thanks for the kind invitation to join your discussions. i wish i had more time to do so, but alas, i have only a few hours per day of internet access, so i spend most of that time looking for papers to write about and answering emails as well as publishing my essays and images.
but i will try to make more of an effort to comment here now and again!
Slashdot Mirror
as community members, we have the responsibility to make sure that the powers-that-be act in accordance to the guidelines they set forward. they should not be allowed to act in a random way, nor to act unethically, nor to act against their own stated policies. so first, because slashdot accepts forbes submissions in other topics the board, even within the week, why did they randomly decide to not accept this particular one? and further, why did they decide to sneakily substitute a different URL -- thereby plagiarising my name, and my words, and erroneously implying that i endorsed that inferior submission, instead of creating a new submission of their own? why did they sneak in to the database yesterday and silently change their substituted URL to the forbes "welcome" page when that was NOT the URL i submitted, either? why not change the database BACK to the actual URL that i submitted and apologise for their misbehaviour, especially since i added the expunged URL to an upthread comment where it was easily seen? oh, and don't forget, but the editors should tell me, SHOULD TELL US ALL, publicly, why did they delete my message that i posted here, in this very thread, yesterday? as slashdot states at the beginning of each story's comments: "The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way." that statement implies that the editors will neither edit nor delete any comments, yet they CLEARLY DO -- when the comments displease them by, say, calling them out for their lack of transparency and for their misbehaviour. and, as a community member who would like to be part of a reputable site, why am i supposed to "shut up" -- as one commenter told me to do upthread -- when i notice these egregious discrepancies, when i have done absolutely nothing wrong by commenting publicly upon them? oh, and one last thing -- this is just for the editors at slashdot: i've taken a screenshot of this comment and will happily repost it if you decide to sneakily delete it as you did with yesterday's comment.
but the point is that I DID NOT POST THAT LINK. my words were stolen to promote a poorly written substitute to the story that i quoted and that i intended to share. if the plagiarist wanted to promote a different story, then that person should never have used MY NAME nor MY WORDS to do so. this bait-and-switch plagiarism should not be allowed to stand on this, or any, reputable site. FYI: here's the link to the story that i shared: http://www.forbes.com/sites/gr... i am sure you'll agree that the piece i shared is far superior to the bait-and-switched australian geographic story.
i did not submit that link. my headline and my words were stolen and the original link to the story i submitted -- http://www.forbes.com/sites/gr... -- was replaced with the australian geographic link. honestly, the australian geographic story pales compared to the story that i shared.
Ah, thanks for the kind invitation to join your discussions. i wish i had more time to do so, but alas, i have only a few hours per day of internet access, so i spend most of that time looking for papers to write about and answering emails as well as publishing my essays and images. but i will try to make more of an effort to comment here now and again!