pla·gia·rism: an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author (emp. mine) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plagiarism
pla·gia·rize: : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source. - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarize
And while as an RC you may not see an attempt to take credit for the work of another, the fact is that unless otherwise attributed, then it is assumed to be that of the poster.
And i do not even see a matter of simply reiteration of some ideas as an issue, but this was blatant pasting of over 400 words from another source without any indication that it was even a copy paste job, except by discerning a contrast btwn the the normal style and ability seen from the poster.
Nor am i the one that made this The Issue, but my comment about posting of a papal polemic without attribution to the source was merely one sentence out of an over 800 word response, which was ignored in any subsequent responses.
Perhaps you owe Larry an apology
Insolence. Rather, that this is what both of you owe.
Are we to now post references to commonly used words? Besides what you emphasized imputes motive.
And while as an RC you may not see an attempt to take credit for the work of another, the fact is that unless otherwise attributed, then it is assumed to be that of the poster.
My being an "RC" has nothing to do with it. Taken to its logical conclusion I suppose plagiarism is in the eye of the beholder, particularly based on one's confession of faith. Besides it's an assumption on your part.
Nor am i the one that made this The Issue, but my comment about posting of a papal polemic without attribution to the source was merely one sentence out of an over 800 word response, which was ignored in any subsequent responses.
You made it an issue when you imputed a motive to deceive on the part of another poster. Is that not what plagiarism is? Deception? Or must I reference a definition that uses that word? As an aside, by what authority do you appeal that demands that your particular brand of polemic merits a response?
Insolence. Rather, that this is what both of you owe.
in·so·lence noun \ˈin(t)-s(ə-)lən(t)s\[1]
Definition of INSOLENCE
1: the quality or state of being insolent
Definition of INSOLENT
in·so·lent adjective \ˈin(t)-s(ə-)lənt\ [2]
1: rude or impolite : having or showing a lack of respect for other people
Nothing rude or impolite about my response. I trust this meets your level of scholarship, however.
[1] "Insolence." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 28 July 2014. .
[2] "Insolent." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 28 July 2014. .
And...lest I be accused of not pinging the person to whom I am referring, I pinged her.