1 4 5 6  8 9 10 13
Here you are wrong Fran, and I happen to agree with Donna. I posted an url to my work in ... with Tony Cooper, and my work was quoted and altered without my consent, and I still take issue with this.

Since you bring in my name, Joanne, you might of mentioned that I was not the one that quoted and altered your work. That was someone else's doing.
Your work wasn't altered anyway. Suggestions were made on how it might be improved, but what appears here is not an alteration of your work. The person that did it did not attribute the revised version to you.
As I remember it, you should have jumped on the suggestions the person made. However, since the "work" had already been "published", it was too late to alter it. For the person to have altered it, he would have had to gone to the source and changed it under the guise of the changes being yours.
Your elevator isn't going all the way up.

Tony Cooper
Orlando FL
I grant that my idea of hilarious and yours may ... haven't made that clear, and they are a tiny minority.

Here you are wrong Fran, and I happen to agree with Donna. I posted an url to my work in ... respect for the intellectual currency of others. You did a stupid thing. Hopefully it won't come back to bite. Joanne

Hmmm ...
As you may have gathered I am very interested in ethical behaviour. In my opinion, every right that demands our respect necessarily advances or protects some measurable legitimate or compelling interest. Ethical behaviour starts from an appreciation of what such interests include and choosing actions that do less harm than good to such interests. Rights that advance or protect no measurable legitimate or compelling interest are unworthy of respect and deserve to be ignored on every occasion when some benefit arises from so doing.
It's conceivable that I've erred in publishing an extract from the student's work, but just to satisfy my curiosity on the matter, perhaps you'll identify the measurable legitimate interest I infringed here. Either that, or you should outline some other basis for restraining my posting above.
As far as I can tell there is not even a notional prospect that her grades might suffer in some way. At the time I saw the paper, hubby had already marked it, made his remarks and moved on. As a matter of interest, some of the observations of posters here (Donna Richoux in particular) caused him to reflect on whether he'd judged her too harshly, before deciding that he hadn't as the rest of the paper was in much the same vein. Instead of getting the standard 20 minutes she got about 40 minutes with some advocacy on her side. Notionally, she got an advantage, though in practice it made no difference.

As to me making fun of her, neither you or anyone can know who she is. Nobody who knows her or is in a position to assist her thinks any the less of her because of this posting. Even if they find this posting, they won't know whose it is. So her self-esteem and prospects ought to be unaffected.
On the other hand, we have all had an opportunity to consider the issues you, I and others have raised in the course of this discussion, which is surely a measurable public good. You may yet convince me that I erred, and that too will be a good, because if so, all of us may be less inclined to repeat my "stupidity".
Fran
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Here you are wrong Fran, and I happen to agree ... without my consent, and I still take issue with this.

Since you bring in my name, Joanne, you might of mentioned that I was not the one that quoted and altered your work. That was someone else's doing.

Though you're one of my favorite misogynists in Usenet Tony, I did not say you made the alteration. However, for the sake of clarification, you are correct to say it wasn't you unless you and Gary are the same person, which might be possible but for the fact that Gary's brain must have been loaned him from one of the smarter gators on the farm.
Your work wasn't altered anyway. Suggestions were made on how it might be improved, but what appears here is not an alteration of your work. The person that did it did not attribute the revised version to you.

It was altered in a post in Usenet Tony, and Gary had no legal right to make that revision in quotes, not even under fair use copyright law.

But I am to be blamed here for joining in with the zoo. What Fran did is highly unethical, and also unkind, and frankly, I hope she gets into trouble, but that isn't my call.
Joanne
- It highlights the vacuousness, tautologicality (?), and internal contradictions of the writing.

Tautologism?

Odysseus
I haven't read any of the postings in this thread, but the subject line caught my eye, and I would like to say again that whenever I read a compilation of the sort the subject line seems to indicate, I strongly suspect that most of the examples have been contrived by teachers or other
non-students.
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Here you are wrong Fran, and I happen to agree ... without my consent, and I still take issue with this.

Since you bring in my name, Joanne, you might of mentioned that I was not the one that quoted and ... source and changed it under the guise of the changes being yours. Your elevator isn't going all the way up.

Ground floor perfumery, stationery and leather goods, wigs and haberdashery, kitchenware and food, going up.
First floor telephones, gents ready-made suits, shirts, socks, ties, hats, underwear and shoes, going up.
Second floor carpets, travel goods and bedding, material, soft furnishings, restaurant and teas, going down.

"In August Rudyard's listlessness called for another series of major and very unpleasant medical examinations.. He later joked ... 'If this is what Oscar Wilde went to prison for, he ought to have got the Victoria Cross.'", Andrew Lycett, "Rudyard Kipling"
Fran -
I am the guilty party Joanne referred to above. She posted the URL to one of her articles and (I thought) was asking for input on it. I found it easier to show the changes I would make as a re-write (of one sentence) rather than try to describe them. I was talking to Joanne at the time, not using her work as my own but just suggesting some changes to her work.
I agree with you that we quote others all the time in this newsgroup. We have to do that in order to talk about the use of the language. It is typically someone saying something wrong or questionable, and then we suggest improvements. In this case someone was offering up her own work for discussion. Joanne got severely *** because she can't take criticism. She accused me of plagiarism and invented a new crime of re-writing someone else's work. That was in February of this year, and she has never let go of it. I have avoided her since, and I would advise others to do the same.
Gary Eickmeier
Fran - I am the guilty party Joanne referred to above. She posted the URL to one of her articles ... let go of it. I have avoided her since, and I would advise others to do the same. Gary Eickmeier

That said, I don't want to become involved in having a shot at her. I read one of her exchanges with Bob Lieblich a while back and I understand that she has some significant legal issues to deal with. Undoubtedly, these would have fallen heavily upon her personal life and I suspect that baggage is making its presence felt in her posts.

I accept you have some issues with her, and you must act as suits you. Trolls and nazis aside, however, I'm disinclined to participate in sending anyone to coventry.All of us here have something worthwhile to bring to this place even if it's just our simple humanity. Everyone should feel that others care about them, that they belong, and matter. Joanne for all I know may think this such a place and I wouldn't want it otherwise for her, because personally, I wish no person ill, not even those whose ideas offend me.
Thanks for putting your side though.
Fran
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Sure, the writer could have done a better job at ... But this falls short of the promised hilarity. (Subject line.)

I grant that my idea of hilarious and yours may be quite different,

True. Humor is elusive.
but the idea that "the lack of a clear definition" or "the misuse of the term" could somehow bear upon the way globalisation affects people struck me as very amusing.

Odd, because that part is easy for me to understand. People having different notions of what a term means often leads to behavioral conflict. If some people think globalization is good and some think it is bad, it is quite likely because they don't mean quite the same thing by it. (As well as the likelihood about different perceptions of good and bad.)
Which is not a request to see more, by the ... of a student of her husband's, without that student's permission.

This is a news group. We talk about the way people use English. This was an example of English used ... material without the express consent of the authors here all the time. We quote user manuals, public statements of politicians,

Those things all feel public, published, as are many of your other examples.
things our friends and relatives have said,

I think many of us are cautious about that one. Who wants to publish something a close relative said and later find out they were horrified by us doing so?
stuff we've heard on the radio or on TV, other posts and so forth. To the best of my knowledge, nobody here has ever sought express consent, and if they have they haven't made that clear, and they are a tiny minority.

And yet, an amazingly voluntary ban exists on on the republication of email. There is some domain of privacy, and the bond between student and teacher might fall in that.
I am not making a profit out of this, nor defaming any person (since nothing I've posted could be used to identify her, or the institution at which she studies).

I do realize that, and I'm glad. Truly public humiliation would be unthinkable.
How would the student feel if she knew that what ... the world as if it were an entertaining bad example?

She's most unlikely to know, but if she did find out, perhaps by searching google, she could respond and defend ... was her so again there is no harm. She can refute my claims posting anonymously. She might actually learn something.

True. Or she just might feel hurt and sulk and sue. No telling.
Do schools have ethical policies about such things? It seems as wrong as reprinting someone's email. And without even a boffo joke to justify it.

What's a boffo joke?

A.Word.A.Day boffo
boffo (BOF-o) adjective
1. (Of a movie, play, or some other show) Extremelysuccessful.
2. (Of a laugh) uproarious, hearty.

noun
1. A great success.
2. A hearty laugh.
3. A gag or punch-line that elicits uproariouslaughter.
(Of uncertain origin. Probably a blend of box office or an alteration of buffo, bouffe, or boffola. The term was popularized by Variety, a magazine for the U.S. entertainment industry.)

Best Donna Richoux
Show more