Subject:
|
Re: Plagiarism again (Was: Can we say, "Plagiarism"?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Jan 2000 21:31:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1045 times
|
| |
|
|
On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Susan Hoover (<8EC76843Erumplestx@209.68.63.236>)
wrote at 15:49:58
> Tony Priestman wrote:
>
> > I haven't looked, so I can't comment on the rules, but rather than
> > getting all formal, they could just say that the submission must
> > include a picture of the submitter *with* their creation, as well as
> > any other pictures.
>
> I thought about suggesting that, but I dismissed it as a bad idea, as
> it might attract kidnappers or child pornographers or something.
Well, they wouldn't have to display the 'proof' picture, just have it as
evidence. One would hope that they've got internal procedures for stuff
like pornography, and no one else needs to see it.
--
Tony Priestman
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Plagiarism again (Was: Can we say, "Plagiarism"?)
|
| (...) But how would they know that the kid pictured was the kid who sent in the application? The safest way to determine that no cheating has taken place might be to cache every LEGO image on the internet and compare using image recognition. A (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
50 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
