Ted Newsom wrote:
GaryP11111 wrote:
The accusation didn't meet the smell test --
I beg to differ. The suggested "explanations" were hypothetical back-flipping. "If Writer B once read Writer A's work and unconsciously remembered it..." "If there's a PR release somewhere with exactly the same phrases and Writer A and Writer B both had it..." "If it was just coincidence..."  What you had was a half-dozen sentences from separate works, one written several years after the first, which were factually and stylistically almost identical.  That smells, ergo the Smell Test is positive.  Doesn't mean Writer B's stuff is bad, or all unoriginal. It's not.  But this stuff... sniff-sniff...


   Not a half-dozen, but four sentences that had fragments and phrases with similar or the same elements as three other sentences. Among the transgressions noted was the singular word "experimenting" and the phrase "became a full-time cameraman". Taken in toto with the other phrases and fragments and in ratio to the article as a whole, such grand larceny may pass your smell test, Ted, but I don't know what small beans smell like.



GARY L. PRANGE
I'm not all bad, just mostly.

"Sic gorgiamus allos subjectos nunc."