on 2013 Aug 02 3:17 PM
It seems that the rules have been changed such that any document for which the essence can be found else where on the web are now deleted. So have gone many of mine.
I would state that I have almost never seen a document posted here where I couldn't find the information somewhere else on the web. I think this really needs much clarification!
Neal
Request clarification before answering.
I don't take this discussion wrong, especially as I do not know what you had posted when and in which forum.
I don't take anything personally except someone offends me, I will still answer someones question tomorrow (if it qualifies), even I had to reject something from him today which did not qualify.
Putting old stuff together does not make it new from my point of view. And if all content is just copy and paste then you do not really become the owner of this content just because you assembled it. The same things explained with own words may be something totally different.
Just one such blog may be acceptable, posting all the blogs this way may cross the imaginary line and lead to different reactions. The border between blogging at point cheating blurs.
You probably still remember school days, we rarely had discussions about a grade after a test in maths, but there was always a moan when you received the grade for an essay.
Even a moderator would like that all other moderators would enforce the rules consistently, but we are from different cultures around the world, we are humans with different opinions and each moderation is time consuming.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Juergen, I just saw this post and wanted to clarify that personal content does not get points for likes/ratings/etc and is not taken into account for missions.
Yes, a few months ago before gamification launch there was a bug and there were feedback points in personal spaces, but that was fixed shortly before the launch, and it was never our intention in the first place.
Hope this helps.
Laure
If a document or blog has just content that got copy and pasted from another source then this is plagiarism, eventually copyright infringement.
Both cases are reported abuse, which hides the document.
Then this plagiarism is documented in collaborative document in the moderator space, and global moderators then check and take action.
The user is usually informed either by direct message from a moderator, or via a small note which is entered when the content gets rejected via the abuse report.
I have seen numerous content that was a 1:1 copy from help.sap.com, which sense does it make to post the help documentation redundant in SCN?
it is so easy to identify copied content. you just mark a certain phrase and do another search via content menu in Google Chrome or copy it to google search in other browsers.
Failure to follow the rules of engagement may result in removal from the community or rejection of posts. Examples of poor behavior include: points-cheating, defaming another member, publishing sexually explicit content, and copyright infringement and/or plagarism.
and in addition there are the moderation rules which can be found here in this forum:
Report all cases of inappropriate behavior, including but not limited to: point-cheating (or point gaming), defaming others, posting sexually explicit content, plagiarizing, and copyright infringement. These behaviors are explained in the “SCN Rules of Engagement”. Occurrences of these behaviors must be reported as abuses on SCN and repeat violations by the same members should be reported to the SCN Collaboration team at <address>.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
this is actually then the first rule:
certainly more strict with content of blog and documents than with the "thanks"-comments to such
But then we go back to there is nothing New on the face of the earth. So should we get rid of "Documents" as a rule?
A couple of my documents bring together multiple sources (documenting where their original sources are) in an attempt to produce one document that will provide a complete solution instead of having you search all over. One would think that this would be considered valuable. Perhaps my values are just not wanted here?
Neal
I need to give a correction here:
"easily looked-up over the net", actually meant "easily looked-up over SCN".
All the same, in most cases, I don't see that most of my documents could be seen anywhere else on SCN. I still claim that there can never be any new content (for the most part) on SCN under these rules!
Neal
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.