Re^2: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

Seconded. Regarding the "shunning wall" and the approval disabling, I like it for two reasons:

Without it, those monks who become Friars in the future and are not aware of this problem would unwittingly approve and/or frontpage nodes by "shunned" monks, so something should be done to prevent this; if not this feature, some explicit mention of the issue in, for example, How do I moderate?, could be appropriate.
More importantly, jesuashok has enough power to approve (his own) nodes. If a decision is made not to approve offenders' posts, some technical restriction must be implemented.

--
David Serrano

Comment on Re^2: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?
by planetscape (Chancellor) on Oct 07, 2006 at 04:38 UTC

Technically, one cannot approve or front-page one's own nodes. However, if one is working in concert with another, it's obviously possible to see how one account can approve, front-page, upvote another, etc. Approval can be withdrawn by janitors, though, and anyone who suspects behaviour as outlined above is advised to give the gods and/or janitors a heads-up. (janitors as a user-group can be messaged the same way you'd message another Monk.)

planetscape

[reply]

Re^4: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

by grep (Monsignor) on Oct 07, 2006 at 06:03 UTC

example

one

the other

grep

One dead unjugged rabbit fish later

[reply]

Re^5: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?

by GrandFather (Saint) on Oct 07, 2006 at 06:10 UTC

There are many actually. Also interesting is the preponderance of root nodes madtoperl posted. Most monks who have been around for a while have contributed many more replies than they have root nodes.

DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel

[reply]

Re^3: How should Perlmonks deal with Plagiarism?
by GrandFather (Saint) on Oct 07, 2006 at 05:12 UTC

I'm sure there are enough interested janitors to keep an eye on the nodes and unapprove them if need be.

Adding a janitorial edit note to the node indicating why it shouldn't be approved should generally be sufficient, although the OP can re-edit to remove such a note. The node can be reaped if need be, but that doesn't give the perp a chance to redeem himself - we should at least allow that chance.

DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel

[reply]