Quote from: Pierce InverarityDepends, depends...

The more teamwork/slavery-oriented the discipline, the more that kind of shit tends to happen. I.e., anything involving lab settings, social and natural sciences, econ. Humanities, not so much. IME.

I know a Harvard professor who was, not fired outright, but made to leave his job after he gave a talk at an international conference and a student stood up and told the audience he'd ripped him off.

Then again, I know an undergraduate who got plagiarized by a professor who just got tenure in the Ivy League and who's too scared to speak out. The thing is, she's wrong--nothing would happen to her, whereas the professor would be in deep shit indeed.

In some cases, a Ph.D. does give you the clout you need, but in others you don't need it.

Re. money: What happened to you is infuriating, but if it's any help a textbook doesn't make anyone rich. The real damage in plagiarism is the unacknowledged credentials.

Hell, publish your paper online as soon as you get it back.  That creates a time/date stamp.  Register your copyright with the Copywrite Office to make that publication date iron-clad.  Then when said professor pulls that shit, you have the Iron Fist of Law on your side as you file your complaint.  (The academic community may not accept online publication, but the law most certainly does and it is the law that matters in such disputes.)

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerThe academic community may not accept online publication, but the law most certainly does and it is the law that matters in such disputes.

I wish, Bradford. But in certain cases--the teamwork/slavery set-ups--you can win a case and lose a career, so Settembrini has a point. In other cases, you can ruin the plagiarist's career without even going to court. Word does get around, and in those instances a date stamp is indeed nice to have.

Well, that´s all ancient history by now.

The only thing really bugging me is that it would be great to just get any kind of credentials for it.

I only found out when I bought the book, the paper was from the year before.

BTW, if you "publish" a term paper as a student, that´s basically irrelevant at all accords. Maybe there´s even some legal stuff of the university owning it in some way. And now, after several years....

He also shrewdly rearranged the phrasing, so it´s really idea, references, diagram and structure theft, and not a copy & paste job. And that´s basically impossible to prove.

It was a shock though, when I found out, and definitely opened my eyes to the wider world of academic rottenness.

But there are other, better people: another Prof repeatedly encouraged  publications of project findings under his name, but with the students as co-authors. Thusly we gained credentials, he kept himself in the debate & conferences, and all were happy.

One of the first pieces of legal work I ever did was a research note on certain insurance provisions in standard contracts.

The senior dude I did it for read it, told me to change the name at the bottom and published it in his name.  Not a word changed.

Such is life, years later when I had trainees assisting me, I made damn sure their names got on the byline too.

Hey, as long as we are on the 'bitter stories from academia' angle, I was once not only plagiarised by a regional development entrepreneurship (they got 3.5 million HUF for their development plan, I got ca. 80.000 for ours), but people at the development agency thought it was my material that was copying the other, right until we showed them that our doc had an earlier date, and was distributed earlier... Of course, the place being Hungary, we didn't sue them because it would have taken several years to collect some measly little amount... from a corporation that may or may not exist at that date. :mad:

I have also been plagiarised by a prominent vice-dean at my ormer university, but in his case, it was at least just PPT slides (used one of my journal articles more or less verbatim under his own name, gave no credit).

Mike Mearls' comments on this thread, and similar threads on other forums noting that D&D 4e doesn't really look like an RPG anymore.

Quote4e: The Many Headed Hydra of Gaming
4e is simultaneously a board game, an MMO (theRPGsite link), a TCG, a miniatures game, but clearly not an RPG. When you think about it, this makes a ton of sense. What we're doing with the game is very simple. If you take all the gamers in the world and subtract RPG players, there you have 4e's audience.

Based on that alone, 4e will be, by several orders of magnitude, the most popular version of D&D ever made.

QED

(Yeah, this is a joke.)

It is interesting to note, though, that denying D&D's status as an RPG is probably the most common attack made against it. Gaming is the only arena where I've seen people who don't like something simply try to define it as something else. It's like trying to dismiss John McCain's presidential qualifications by claiming that he isn't actually a politician or involved in the election. Further, in my experiences in the early, Gaming Outpost era of indie gaming, any claim that an indie game wasn't an RPG was met with ridiculously fierce resistance, to the point that slagging a game as utter crap would get fewer complaints. Any pop psychologists want to weigh in on this?

Alternatively, do people who like RPGs really, really, really hate all other types of games? I've never heard anyone say that Halo sucks because it's really an RTS, or that WoW sucks because everyone knows it's actually a boardgame. I guess you could claim that a sucky MMO with like 300 people scattered across a server isn't really an MMO because the only thing massive about it is the debt run up in spending years getting ready to push it off a cliff.

Mearls' argument is like the blind men with the elephant. But disingenuous.

The point is not that we "hate" other types of games, it's that we want our roleplaying games to be roleplaying games, especially THE roleplaying game that started them all.  If I want a tactical skirmish game, I'll play Chainmail or whatever the hell it is the kids are playing these days.  That's why it makes sense to make the argument that x game is not an rpg.  It doesn't mean that we don't like the other type of game that it may more closely resemble.  It's just that when we belly up to the table to play a roleplaying game, there are certain elements that we expect and 4e seems to be showing fewer and fewer of those elements.

Quote from: walkerpMearls' argument is like the blind men with the elephant. But disingenuous.

The point is not that we "hate" other types of games, it's that we want our roleplaying games to be roleplaying games, especially THE roleplaying game that started them all.  If I want a tactical skirmish game, I'll play Chainmail or whatever the hell it is the kids are playing these days.  That's why it makes sense to make the argument that x game is not an rpg.  It doesn't mean that we don't like the other type of game that it may more closely resemble.  It's just that when we belly up to the table to play a roleplaying game, there are certain elements that we expect and 4e seems to be showing fewer and fewer of those elements.

Quite, I love boardgames, I love computer games, I love miniatures skirmish gaming, I could even learn to love wargames I imagine.

What I don't love is games that try to straddle the gaps between the categories and end up being neither one nor the other.  It's like those bizarro gun/weapon hybrids that got experimented with in the Renaissance.  Axes with guns in the handle, that weren't terribly useful as guns or axes.

4e is the gun/axe of the roleplaying world.

Quote from: Balbinus4e is the gun/axe of the roleplaying world.

You aren't going to wait to see just how many people it kills before pronouncing that?

Quote from: Stuart's quote of Mike MearlsFurther, in my experiences in the early, Gaming Outpost era of indie gaming, any claim that an indie game wasn't an RPG was met with ridiculously fierce resistance, to the point that slagging a game as utter crap would get fewer complaints. Any pop psychologists want to weigh in on this?

It's the difference between "I don't like you" and "you're not even a person." One is a statement of opinion, the other an attempt to strip you of your identity.

Quote from: BalbinusQuite, I love boardgames, I love computer games, I love miniatures skirmish gaming, I could even learn to love wargames I imagine.

What I don't love is games that try to straddle the gaps between the categories and end up being neither one nor the other.  It's like those bizarro gun/weapon hybrids that got experimented with in the Renaissance.  Axes with guns in the handle, that weren't terribly useful as guns or axes.

4e is the gun/axe of the roleplaying world.

Which is why nobody will ever play it, right?

Lets just make a bet on this. The game hasn't been released yet, so either of us could be right.  If nobody ever plays D&D4, you will be proven right, and I will leave the hobby for good.

If people do play this game and it is well received, I hereby challenge you to leave the hobby for good, and never come back. Not to this website, not to a convention, not to any gaming store. Ever.

This goes for any of you!

Anyone care to take this bet?

Quote from: Abyssal MawIf people do play this game and it is well received, I hereby challenge you to leave the hobby for good, and never come back. Not to this website, not to a convention, not to any gaming store. Ever.

Why do you want to do that?  Because you want there to be only one roleplaying game?  Because you can't bear anyone playing anything else?  Because you can't bear anyone gainsaying your chosen game?  Why would you want to make a bet like this? Because you want to reduce someone to the same misery you felt when you fell out with 2e?  You go on about "this hobby", but all you really mean is whatever iteration of game design currently goes under the brand name of "D&D".

That's some fucked up shit, AM.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaWhy do you want to do that?  Because you want there to be only one roleplaying game?  Because you can't bear anyone playing anything else?  Because you can't bear anyone gainsaying your chosen game?  Why would you want to make a bet like this? Because you want to reduce someone to the same misery you felt when you fell out with 2e?

That's some fucked up shit, AM.

!i!

I don't care if other games exist, or if other people play them. I just want to bet whether 4th edition D&D will be a success. I say it will be. He says "it's the gun/axe".

You know I'm good for it. Any of you who actually believe in what you are saying  will take the bet, right?

Quote from: Abyssal MawI don't care if other games exist, or if other people play them.

I think you do. And I think people's preference of other games over yours offends you.

QuoteI just want to bet whether 4th edition D&D will be a success. I say it will be. He says "it's the gun/axe".

I won't speak for Balbinus, but I believe you've misinterpreted his comment.

QuoteYou know I'm good for it.

Really, I don't.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaWhy do you want to do that?  Because you want there to be only one roleplaying game?  Because you can't bear anyone playing anything else?  Because you can't bear anyone gainsaying your chosen game?  Why would you want to make a bet like this? Because you want to reduce someone to the same misery you felt when you fell out with 2e?

That's some fucked up shit, AM.

!i!

Oh shit, I just figured it out. You can easily see that I didn't say anything whatsoever about people playing other games or that people shouldn't like or even love other games or even that people don't totally have the right NOT to like D&D of any edition. or that games should disappear or anything of the sort. But you sort of brought that all up. Independently! It's like.. right under the fucking surface.

and the obvious reason you brought that up is...

Your'e terrified. all of you.