Quote from: wooI_Ioow on Today at 07:37:55 AM

Maybe this time I have to challenge Russian section and place there my "genuine" Ratimiv's style article . Ratimov does reverse in the local

https://www.fidelitydigitalassets.com/articles/corporate-treasurer-bitcoin

[...]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5281318.msg55817867#msg55817867

[...]

What do you think?

I confirmed (with a spot check, not word-by-word collation) that the post indeed matches Google Translate’s output. However, this one is clearly attributed at the top, and is therefore not plagiarism. It is a copy-paste, of course. But not plagiarism.

“Автор” = ‘Author’; “Оригинал” = ‘Original’

Quote from: Ratimov on December 13, 2020, 12:52:04 PM

Почему корпоративные казначейства могут рассматривать Биткоин

Автор: Ria Bhutoria и Tess McCurdy
Оригинал: WHY CORPORATE TREASURERS MAY CONSIDER BITCOIN

[Google Translated text.]

I observe that this post was made on 2020-12-13, after this thread was raised on 2020-12-05. Ratimov’s citation is in a more or less similar format to what I myself suggested 2020-12-10; and he uses exactly the format for (human) translations that I suggested to wolwoo on 2020-04-17; thus, I certainly don’t call that plagiarism.

(If it were the unattributed copy of a human translation published elsewhere, then it would be a plagiarism of the translation; I have recently begun to suspect that generally, there may be rampant plagiarism of translations by fake translators. But I think that the application of principle to automated translation tools is subtle, and not always so easy to answer. Ratimov’s abuse of Google Translate for his pretense of being a translator (!) to and from languages that he positively claims not to know (!!) is certainly fraudulent, dishonest, and untrustworthy; but is it plagiarism? I lean towards “yes” because he does it habitually, and oftentimes with the explicit claim that he is the translator. I think that the claim of being a translator pushes it over the line. Other cases may differ.)

On its face, Ratimov’s post does blatantly violate (at least) Global Rule #27, and also the Russian local rule against “stuffing” that lovesmayfamilis so helpfully raised in the bitcoinst case (plus the rule against low-value posts). As mprep recently noted, moderators have discretion to apply the spirit of the rules, not merely the letter thereof; I appreciate this, and I do not suggest that rules should ever be applied mechanistically. However, if Ratimov does this frequently (let alone makes a career of it), then it clearly must be prohibited unless there are special rules just for him. The spirit of the rules is, after all, to stop sigspammers from making rank, merit, and money with negligible effort by flooding the forum with stuff they don’t actually produce, thus drowning out quality posts and reducing the quality of discussion for everyone.

Quote from: mprep on July 21, 2014, 05:27:51 PM

27. Using automated translation tools to post translated content in Local boards is not allowed.

Internal quotation expanded:

Quote from: airfinex on December 10, 2020, 04:24:28 PM

Quote from: lovesmayfamilis on October 04, 2020, 08:05:03 AM

Quote

Messages must be original. "Stuffing" the number of messages made by the copy-paste principle from another resource is unacceptable. Such messages fall under the first paragraph of the rules.

Quote from: xandry on March 17, 2015, 06:10:35 PM

7. Cooбщeния дoлжны быть opигинaльными. "Haбивaниe" кoличecтвa cooбщeний cдeлaнныx пo пpинципy кoпи-пacтa c дpyгoгo pecypca нeдoпycтимo. Пoдoбныe cooбщeния пoдпaдaют пoд пepвый пyнкт пpaвил.