Precious Roy wrote:
It is not plagiarism. It is at best editorial nit picking over whether quotation marks were necessary (very subjective in the context of directly speaking about another author's work) and a section where a reference to her dissertation advisor's work was further down in an appendix instead of being more prominent. Pretty much by definition there is no plagiarism when your dissertation advisors approves of how you have referenced his work.
All these clowns do is take plagiarism software and run it through someone's dissertation they do not like. There is absolutely nothing in here that is anywhere close to meeting the intent required for plagiarism.
Dude - take your liberal stuff elsewhere. Of course you would defend her not matter what.
"It has been revealed by Christopher Rufo and Chris Brunet that Harvard University president Claudine Gay plagiarized sections of her PhD disertation. These revelations come after Gay defended antisemitism on campus after having condemned so-called misgendering and failure to use preferred pronouns.
Rufo and Brunet reported unequivocally that Gay's dissertation in defense of her doctoral degree "Taking Charge: Black Electoral Success and the Redefinition of American Policies," published in 1997, "contains at least three problematic patterns of usage and citation." They found that her disertation lifted "an entire paragraph nearly verbatim" from a previous paper from authors Lawrence Bobo and Franklin Gilliam called "Race, Sociopolitical Participation, and Black Empowerment."
