Posts by driftinggull13

Harold Phillips54 said:They really are, just a bunch of nobodies—including a certain group of forum users on this thread who stubbornly refuse to accept a clear, unambiguous statement from the University of Augsburg. They can't seem to grasp that everything was perfectly legitimate and that he followed the university rules that were in place at the time the work was completed. And that was 27 years ago.
Whether different rules exist now is completely irrelevant to research conducted under the guidelines active when it was actually written. Twenty-seven years ago.
That’s the core issue with this whole mindset. Just like with Zovko and Dickey, there’s way too much raw emotion involved. We basically demonized this man for months without cause, made a mistake, and now we're expected to apologize.

What kind of headspace do you have to be in to keep crucifying and slandering someone out of pure spite—even after an official statement from the University of Augsburg regarding a man with more credentials than all of us on this thread combined—just because he aligns with a different political faction than his critics?

He did file it, and he's seeking symbolic damages—clearly just for the sake of vindication against the damage to his reputation and the public smear campaign.

By doing this, alongside his high level of education, he's showing real character.

It’s like conservatives aren't allowed to practice basic reading comprehension anymore... nothing about his doctorate is considered "clean" or "moral," and the University of Augsburg made that perfectly clear. Unambiguously.
Just because the rules have changed doesn't mean there aren't legal consequences (otherwise, they would have revoked the degree), but that doesn't change the fact that the work itself was legitimate. That's what the statement says, plain and simple.

Betty Ross6 said:If someone sticks to the same topic they've already covered and copies maybe 50-60% of the text from their old paper, that's plagiarism. I wonder if there's an actual rulebook for this—like, does it count if it's 5% or 20%, or does it have to be 50% or 70%? I guess anything over half should probably trigger it...

And if he didn't cite himself, people shouldn't be making such a huge deal out of it. Most people make that rookie mistake thinking, "Hey, I wrote this, so I can just grab whatever parts I want whenever I feel like it." It’s a common slip-up early on. You might let it slide for a bachelor's or master's degree, but for a PhD, the standards should be way tighter. Still, by God, he did mention his own work. It would be much worse if he was stealing from someone else without credit, so why all the panic... At the end of the day, it isn't just on him; it's on the mentor too. If they had any real conversation about the project, they should have warned him about the rules...

The whole second paragraph is just wrong. Besides, he isn't some novice. A doctoral dissertation is supposed to be an original piece of work, not a patchwork of stuff written by himself or anyone else. Following your logic, I could just write 500 different papers where I recycle my own text every single time and claim it's still "my" work, essentially using one single study to climb the ladder all the way to being a tenured professor. It’s pretty obvious that the mentor shares the blame, but that doesn't change what Barišić did... I mean, the relationship between a mentor and a candidate is supposed to be built on mutual trust, isn't it? The issue here isn't just about the formal rules, which is what Pavo Barišić keeps bringing up, or that jerk on the Supreme Court who copied his entire dissertation... What rules was the mentor supposed to warn him about? Is Barišić some little kid? He's a grown man with a Master's degree under his belt and several scientific papers already published... claiming he didn't know better is like killing your neighbor and then arguing you're innocent because nobody told you murder was illegal. Why not just admit the guy was cutting corners and somehow managed to get away with it... and it's not even the first time, either. He pulled the same stunt with his scientific articles.

Betty Ross6 said:Alright, look, does anyone here actually know what counts as plagiarism? I mean, seriously, can't a person just "plagiarize" themselves? Does anyone here even have a degree or deal with grad school theses? I always cited my sources whenever it made sense, and if I'm following this logic correctly, apparently citing your own previous work is now considered plagiarism... Give me a break. It’s just enough to make a guy lose his mind 😵

You didn't quite catch the point there...

Harold Phillips54 said:Dr. Pavo Barišić tells CNN: 'It is now crystal clear whose scientific credibility was actually at stake and what the true motives were.'

Press release from Augsburg

The official statement from the University of Augsburg reads:

"In February 2017, formal complaints were filed against Prof. Dr. Pave Barišić regarding his dissertation titled 'world and ethos. Hegelian views on the fall of the West,' which he submitted during the summer semester of 1989 at the then Faculty of Arts and University of Augsburg.

Upon receiving the final reports from both university committees tasked with investigating these allegations, the University of Augsburg has reached its final conclusion regarding the matter in question:

A) There was no violation of the University of Augsburg's general 'Principles for Handling Suspected Scientific Misconduct,' and consequently,

B) It cannot be determined whether any violations occurred under the Promotion Regulations of the former Faculty of Arts and University of Augsburg that would justify accusing Mr. Barišić of intentional fraud or warranting further disciplinary action."

I highly recommend opening this link and reading the full text—with some perspective:

The man has now filed a lawsuit, reportedly seeking $2,000 in damages.
If I were in his shoes, I'd be asking for ten times that amount and donating every cent to charity.
He’s been dragged through the mud by the media and even by people here on this forum, all based on these baseless accusations. He deserves way more than what he's asking for.

That link has absolutely nothing to do with what Barišić actually did. Augsburg CONFIRMED the plagiarism, so you really need to learn the difference between an action and the consequences of that action... Barišić isn't going to sue because he knows he'll lose hands down.

ironowl68 said:Plagiarism isn't some political thing...

I mean, yeah, I totally agree... assuming you aren't a right-winger, anyway. That's how it works, right?😁

nimblelynx63 said:What a pathetic ad hominem attack. ☕

See, unlike your little theory... mine is actually built on real, verifiable facts... 😉

nimblelynx63 said:To quote a forum regular: “read, read, and just keep reading”...

But you’ve got other things to worry about: you'd rather tattoo "conservative" on your skin.
Is your forehead really more important than your forearm?

🤦 so you're talking about Q1 and Q2......😁

Steven Lee15 said:So what happens now? Has the University of Augsburg completely scrapped Barišić's work?

🤦 Just read, read, and keep on reading... if you actually want to understand anything at all.

Rebecca Diaz said:Look, my argument is simple: Barišić read Schlesinger's text and basically copy-pasted a chunk of it into his own article. He made some minor tweaks to the word order and sentence structure, then conveniently "forgot" to credit Schlesinger—even though he cited every other single source in that piece.

For what it's worth, Barišić's article runs seven pages and has six footnotes, one of which is Schlesinger's text. I honestly can't wrap my head around how Barišić managed to miss citing that specific source.

At the end of the day, it's up to you guys to decide whose version of events actually holds water.

The right wing will believe anything as long as it favors their own people. 🍿

in passing said:Nope.
I'm also just sitting here waiting for them to actually show some backbone... though honestly, I'm starting to think we're all just wasting our time...

They showed plenty of character just by stepping up and filing that report. There's absolutely no need for apologies here. Maybe if we tattooed that concept onto the foreheads of those MAGA types, they might actually remember it for once...😉

nimblelynx63 said:Look, it wasn't published as an identical copy; they just took that specific section from Schlesinger's text. And by the way, it was properly cited in that Spanish paper.

Like I said... catch me copying someone else and suddenly I'll start rambling and somehow everything is fine all of a sudden...😁

Steven Lee15 said:Did that amateur, Đikić, actually bother apologizing to Mr. Barišić?

Honestly, there’s zero reason for him to bother apologizing... He should just try reading, reading, and reading some more. Maybe start by catching up on the last ten pages of this thread at least...

nimblelynx63 said:Look, if it's been republished in a corrected form, it obviously passed review. Where it was first published, I have no idea... or if that initial version was even reviewed at all.

It's funny how you felt the need to lecture me on how things work, especially regarding experimental results...
I have plenty of papers in Q1 and Q2 journals to know exactly what I'm talking about.

Give me a break... you can't just publish the exact same paper twice. Unless, of course, you're trying to get caught... which is apparently what some researchers out in certain parts of the world do—you know, sending the same study under different titles to multiple journals all at once... though occasionally you might see a corrigendum. If you actually had the publication record you claim to have, you'd realize what you're saying is impossible, and honestly, it's pretty telling that you didn't even bother addressing the comparison I made...

nimblelynx63 said:The whole point of me dropping that link is to prove my case: Barišić didn't just quote it, he published it outright. He didn't offer an apology or anything—he just went ahead and cited it in the next edition

So what, if they catch you red-handed and you offer a little apology, suddenly everything is fine? 😁 Did it go through peer review again or something? The paper itself is different now, and those theories everyone thought were his aren't even his anymore... It’s like if I went out and published a study using someone else's experimental data, and then once I got busted, I just said "my bad" and claimed the results weren't mine to begin with. It doesn't really work like that... 😉

I’m thinking about putting some money into a third-party retirement fund... does anyone have a solid recommendation on which one I should go with?

Tyler Peterson5 said:😂😂😂
this is hands down the most intense thread on this entire board so far...🤣🤣

Just try doing some single-arm dumbbell curls in the morning and you'll see those biceps popping up like mushrooms after a heavy rainstorm...

Yeah, but it’s kind of an asymmetrical movement, isn't it.......

Maria Thompson57 said:I honestly don't get it, and I never have... I’ve never been one to track calories because, let's be real, I just don't have the willpower or the patience to write down every single little thing I eat... constantly calculating and obsessing over whether I had one gram more or one gram less of something... I mean, I've read all those articles online about how "essential" it is and blah blah blah... and hey, major props to anyone who can actually pull that off, seriously, if you have the time and the mental energy to deal with all that, I tip my hat to you... but personally? Yeah, it's just not happening for me right now...
So, I actually managed to drop about 46 pounds over the last year just by hitting the gym and nothing else, no crazy dieting involved... honestly, I feel like I could probably keep the momentum going even if I sat down and polished off a chocolate bar every single day... 🙂
Sometimes I just sit here and feel this wave of regret when I think about how much weight I could probably drop if I actually had some discipline... you know, if I stopped reaching for the chocolate or cutting out all the bread and junk food entirely... but honestly, looking at where I am right now, I don't even know if it's worth the struggle. It’s kind of a relief, really, because I've reached this point where I can skip the gym for an entire week and still eat whatever sugary crap I want without seeing the scale budge even a single ounce... it's a weird kind of freedom, I guess...

I mean, sure, that’s one way to look at it... but I can't help feeling like Stipe is just messing with those math nerds... you know, the ones who spend all their time crunching numbers on spreadsheets instead of actually breaking a sweat in the gym...😁

So, we’re sitting there with a two-point lead, just one minute left on the clock, feeling like we actually have this in the bag... and then, five seconds later, everything just completely falls apart... honestly, we really are something else, aren't we... absolute masters at blowing it...

Germany's at a 4 out of 2, honestly... the Germans just handle things better...