Quote:
Originally Posted by Blossom
Those screenshots are too tiny!
I have now seen valid proof through someone I trust and yes she did copy scenes from the Dusty FanFic. It's not very obvious as first but she slipped up a few times and left too many words similar that when you run them through a compare software it catches them.
No one has posted the parts I saw but they are too identical not to be copied unlike the quotes posted which show some similarities these are nearly word for word which are no doubt in my mind copied.
|
The person who made the initial review stated that she didn't finish the book. She presented 8 instances of similar fragments and invited people to make their own decisions. She left the decision and accusation in the hands of higher powers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caleb72
And...?
I've already responded to that and the detail really wasn't significant to my impressions, nor to my opinions about the behaviours of either group in the discussion - especially because my impressions were received when I actually read the thread and at that time the sequence of events would have been more obvious to me.
Are we actually disagreeing about anything? Because it seems like you're trying really hard to disprove something; as if a misremembered detail in the sequence of events somehow invalidates the case in a court of law. Are you particularly sensitive about this event?
|
It's a misremembered detail on top of a misremembered sequence of events. And the way you presented the sequence is matched by the way it was presented in the media, so there was some type of mass delusion distorting the sequence for many. And you say that the sequence doesn't matter, but it does.
Imagine this situation: X's foot is sticking out and trips Y. Y makes a comment about people sticking their feet out, other people get involved there is a huge argument after which X apologies for the placement of the foot and tries to leave and put the whole mess behind.
The situation is not the same as saying: X's foot is sticking out and trips Y. Other people get involved there is a huge argument after which X apologies for the placement of the foot and tries to leave and put the whole mess behind and someone makes a comment about people sticking their feet out.
The situation is that X made a mistake and didn't apologize for it until the whole thing became a mess.
If the sequence of events is presented differently and the person who got tripped making a comment after being tripped becomes in this new presentation a random person who made a comment after X apologized and tried to stop the mess and leave it isn't the same thing.