You’re a plagiarist.
Plagiarism = reposting something verbatim without attribution.
Plagiarist.
You’re right. Time is of the essense and I have to leave soon. Even if I didn’t, however, I still wouldn’t bother going back and pointing out things that are contained in the very OP of this thread. You yourself just agreed that the article doesn’t appear to be making fun of people who are genuinely impaired, yet that disingenuous glurge you posted in regard to it suggests the very opposite. Neither the parody nor I were making fun of genuinely disadvantaged people; we were and are making fun of the silly ways that Democrats and liberals seek to create"victims" and then bilk the American taxpayer so as to buy their votes.
May I refer you to post #117 and the last sentence of post #119?
elucidator, you are asking Stanley to understand a relatively nuanced distinction. I say relatively, because any 6th grader could be expected to pick up on such a distinction. In this case, I think you are expecting too much. It was all that this tool could do to cut and paste. (Can one eat virtual paste, I wonder?)
Sure. I don’t care if it was obvious to everyone that it was a repost of some piece of Internet glurge. It was a verbatim repost without attribution. You’re a plagiarist.
Plagiarist.
Bullshit once again. First of all, I don’t believe you for a second that that’s how you meant it, mostly because that’s not even remotely how it came off.
Bullshit twice again. You posted it with no attribution. By definition, you were passing it off as your own. You didn’t even mention your sister or an email until you were called out.
Babble, babble, babble, babble.
You can pick apart the distinctions of what those other authors meant all you want, because it doen’t have dick to do with the shit you pulled. You can whip out all the excuses you please. If no one had recognized the Onion article, I guarantee you we wouldn’t have heard word one about your sister or her email account.
The Leonard Cohen song “The Future” came up in a recent CS thread. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard the song, but the phrase “I’ve seen the future” appears at the end of the first verse (and again at the end of the song).
Do you think this means Leonard Cohen didn’t write anything in the song after the first verse? He’s the only songwriter credited, so I guess he’s either a plagiarist or your understanding of what the phrase “I’ve seen the future” means is not universally accepted.
Hint: It’s the second one. The phrase “I’ve seen the future” does not mean “Someone else wrote the following.” The phrase is normally followed by the author’s OWN predictions about the future, written in their OWN words.
Once more unto the breach and then I have to leave.
(Oh, btw, that breach comment? It’s from Shakespeare. You know, just to avoid confusion and all. I didn’t actually write it myself. Well, I did…just now…but I’m not the first one to write it. Maybe Shakespeare wasn’t either, but who knows? Still, he’s the one who gets credit for it and I don’t want anyone to think that by my merely typing it that I’m claiming it as my own. Uh…am I making myself clear?)
Anyway, you might want to take note of the definition of plagiarize as per M-W online:
Main Entry: pla·gia·rize
Pronunciation: \ˈplā-jə-ˌrīz also -jē-ə-\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pla·gia·rized; pla·gia·riz·ing
Etymology: plagiary
Date: 1716
transitive verb
: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : use (another’s production) without crediting the source
intransitive verb
: to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
— pla·gia·riz·er noun
So you see, there has to be deceptive intent. Reiteration that is ignorant of the source does not qualify.
No, but what it does have dick to do with is to address another one of your ever-changing goalposts. You say one thing in support of your position which is not your postion itself, and then when I show that it’s wrong you revert to your original position and claim it still stands. Then you say something else in support of your position but which isn’t your position itself, and then when I prove you wrong there, you retreat again to your original position and claim my response has nothing to do with what you said about it. Rinse, repeat.
You’re not looking good here, though it is becoming easier to see how you’ve come by your moniker. You’re as batty as your comrade Hector. Now luci, there’s a guy with a brain. You might do well to study how he presents himself. He couches his wrongful interpretations in such flowery and noble prose that one has to work fairly hard to discern just where he’s gone off the track. No such case with you, though. Your faulty thought processes are obvious for all to see.
(And now I’m out. Goodnight, Hector; goodnight, Zoe!) 
Use another’s words without crediting the source, yep. As you did. Plagiarist.
Still making excuses, huh theif?
Per WHAT YOU POSTED:
*: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : use (another’s production) without crediting the source
*
Where did you credit the source in the OP.
I’m changing goal-posts. Me. The guy who has recognized your weaseling bullshit, through the good graces of the people who totally fucking busted you.
However, you with the … “but, but, but … this is what I really meant” … you’re the perfectly sterling one.
Go ahead, Stan. Keep making a complete idiot of yourself. I’m enjoying the trainwreck.
There’s a distinction. I addressed it above at the bottom of post #139 but with a couple of accidental omissions. I’ll repeat it here with the appropriate corrections:
“Having said that, however, it is also a fact that what they were writing about was not their composition but the subject of it. In this case, the composition itself was the subject and [it] was what foretold the future. Therefore, the phrase “I have seen…” indicates that the written [part] itself foretells the future and not that I have written an article describing it.”
Brad the Impared, theft (and the word you wanted was “thief”) by definition requires intent. Stealing and “passing off” both require intent to do so. This was lacking in my case, as is obvious by my quite truthful explanation of how I came to post it. If you want to take the position that I’m lying, that is your privilege, but it changes nothing in terms of the facts. And the facts are that I neither stole nor tried to pass off the post as my own, and I am therefore not, as a matter of fact, a plagiarist.
Jack, you might want to think about backing off a bit. You’re starting to look as loony as prr.
ETA: I’m out. Have at it.
Plagiarism only requires that you post someone else’s words verbatim without attribution. As you did, and as your very own cites support.
Plagiarist.
Sorry, but you’re wrong, dear. I see no such description in the dictionary definition. If you want to go around deciding for yourself what words mean, far be it from me to try to stop you. Just know that it makes you look like a dolt when you do.
No, I’m using the word as defined in the dictionary and by the vast majority of educational institutions in this country, including the one I attended.
Plagiarist.
Dumbass.
Thief.
(That’s my line for you.)
I’d agree that this accurately describes someone who openly and unapologetically plagiarizes.
Plagiarist, plagiarist, plagiarist.
By the way, I didn’t know that they used filthy invective like that back in the 1950s when everybody was awesome.
Your “I meant to trip over that curb!” pantomime is comedy at its finest, M. Artiste. Please ignore the pleas of the masses and never change.
You’re down to name calling and spelling correction? Thats all you’ve got?
The intent was clear. You posted it, uncredited, under your name. I notice, you totally leave out the fact that you were well aware of board rules and norms regarding copying someone elses work uncredited, even though you made perfectly sure to mention that the post fell within board rules. If you didn’t want others to think you wrote it, you wouldn’t have done that. Anything else is an excuse. So, excuse away, name call away, I’ll try and make sure I google those to see if they’re stolen as well.