Apology to Everyone
A community is self-correcting. That means when I make a mistake, someone out there catches it and lets me know. Thank you, Ginger Hearn, for pointing out a real blunder in the January 30 edition of Todayâs Word. I wrote as if I were speaking about Simeon when the text is actually about Zacharias, the father of John. So I have corrected it, and if you keep copies of Todayâs Word, you will need to go back and get the right one for January 30.
Itâs interesting to me that only one person caught this real mistake. Perhaps the rest of us, including me, were so âfamiliarâ with the story that we didnât notice or perhaps we were so intent on the Messianic implications that we just skipped over this glaring defect. Anyway, we are back on track now, thanks to Ginger.
Skip
I have my suspicions that this was a sneaky plot to expose those of us who systematically keep each âTodayâs Wordâ pasted into a memory file. Just like pirating Skipâs YouTube videos (or those recorded at other places he has spoken) to avoid the minimal requested compensation for his hard work (15 big ones for Todayâs Word archive in this case).
There probably is some nefarious capability on this new web site that records those who are returning to obtain the âcorrectedâ copy and now we will have to be wondering if Skip is two steps behind us and never letting us out of his sight. Paranoia is setting in.
But I have my reasoningâs; Iâm the crazy guy who creates a 3 category index each year. My format allows for the year end content to be accessed either by Hebrew/Greek word, date, or Scripture Citation (Never by title because thatâs usually just the âGotch Yaâ ringer that draws us in). Have you ever remembered Skip writing something in Todayâs Word that has relevance to an âin the momentâ occurrence? Yeah go ahead and flip through the 4 or 5 hundred pages from a years past content you actually paid for.
Itâs much better to spend hundreds of hours doing what I do then moments obtaining it online as complete years (am I an idiot or what?).
Iâm headed to the donation page.
Thanks for contributing again. It really helps.
So, Richard, perhaps offering that index to your fellow TWers for a fee which is actually a donation to Skip would be an incredible way to help the community . Iâd be interested!! Anyone else?
Hi Leslee!
I index the daily writing by the date it is written instead of page 1,2,3, etc.; My Index itself is broken into the Torah, Neviâim, Kâituvim and Brit HadashaâŠso what this means is the first listing (in Torah = Genesis verse) follows with the verse written on by Skip in order although he may not have written on any Genesis verse until 3.23.16. It is the 3.23.16 date which would put it on the 82nd page (total days passed in the year until that posting) which is paged as 3.23.17. The second on Genesis by Skip might be 5.2.16 and thus would be that much further away in the total. AND THATâS THE LEAST INSANE PART OF MY METHOD! The Four column index leads with verse citation, then key words, then language word, then date composed.
What Iâm saying then is to take my index as a âcontentsâ page and apply it to something you might have, would just not work unless you re-paged yours by date composed.
For me to send the entire years posting of Skips with my system applied would be a breach of copyright. I can send you just the index page for this year so far so that you can see how I do it and perhaps apply it to yours if you wish. My email address is rjgambino@cox.net
This system does allow me to quickly reference Skips idea on a particular verse pretty quickly. And thatâs the key part for meâŠthe verse itself.
OH EMM GEEEâŠ.this is perfect. Iâve actually set up my own little file for everything i can find of his on Jeremiah and was going to get around to sending him a note asking him if ever considered sending out some kind of download of his work by the books in Scripture, i reference them that way so often.
Itâs tedious, at best, but has proven very rewarding.
I love the humorous way you have presented this. Being holy is draining for me these days.
OKâŠjust checking bcp; Thereâs quite a play on words in your last sentence; âBeing holy is draining for me these daysâ. Did you see it and mean it the way I see it? Think about a colander used for draining spaghettiâŠ
Iâll make sure to give you credit for the quote of your words when I use it. I thought it was pretty funny way to say it.
Hahahahah!
Have you SEEN my posts on my (non existent) cooking abilities? Trust me you took my words to a far different direction then i ever considered. I promise you i have NEVER strained spaghetti, and even tho i own a colander, i purchased it because it was stainless steel, (read somewhere that was the best one to have) and pretty, I use it to hold bowls that fit in it. The handle fell off, but i saved it, because thatâs what i do.
Do feel free to use the quote AND be sure to give credit, footnote, bibliography, page number, date, number of posts down, etc.. Would NOT want you to be guilty of plagiarism or anything like that.
That being said, itâs a perfect example o what this blog is all about isnât it?
The interpretation of the written word and how the author intended it, initially?
Exactly right, bcp. Thank you very kindly for the reminder.
I wondered if quoting an entire Hymn without a mention of the composer be in the same category of PLAGIARISM? Or, does that only apply to certain folks targeted, whom one disagree with in âopinionsâ?
Funny you should ask that question. Because yes, it is the same thing. And yes, you could very well be fined up to $50,000 and 1 year in jail for doing such a âpetty and nonsensical thingâ. No, you can not quote in part or in whole someone else writings, hymns, or commentaries without at least giving credit.
Case in point. At our Shul, we actually pay a yearly copyright use fee. Not only for the right to project the hymn up on the screen (in part or in whole) but, to use and sing them as well. Why? Because itâs the law.
This is from plagiarism.org â Maybe itâs a good idea if people familiarise themselves with it.
DOES IT MATTER HOW MUCH WAS COPIED?
Not in determining whether or not plagiarism is a crime. If even a small part of a work is found to have been plagiarized, it is still considered a copyright violation. However, the amount that was copied probably will have a bearing on the severity of the punishment. A work that is almost entirely plagiarized will almost certainly incur greater penalties than a work that only includes a small amount of plagiarized material.
IF I CHANGE THE WORDS, DO I STILL HAVE TO CITE THE SOURCE?
Changing only the words of an original source is NOT sufficient to prevent plagiarism. You must cite a source whenever you borrow ideas as well as words.
Guess some people take the law VERY serious.
Now maybe we can move on? Shalom.
See, I am exactly right referring to- âOr, does that only apply to certain folks targeted, whom one disagree with in âopinionsâ?â
Check out your own comments above with TW âBreatheâ, you should find a HYMN quoted in FULL, with no attribution to composer- Words by Jean S. Pigott, 1876.
Was there a even a squeak from you, Mark!! That has been done many times by the same person, (NOT meant to be personal to that person).
Proving you are NOT as âlaw-abidingâ as you pride yourself to be,-âGuess some people take the law VERY serious.â INDEED?
OR, simply to show what a JERK you are. Go examine your spirit!
The thing is, I wasnât interacting with the person you are referencing. Nor am I trying to police the thousands of comments on this site by other people. Never have, never will. My whole comment and point originally, to you, was very simple. I just tried to tell you that I personally donât want to interact with someone that wants to copy and paste massive responses from some teaching or study they wrote in the past, nor do I âpersonallyâ want to interact with someone that wants to copy or use someone elseâs work, commentaries, etc, and pawn it off as their own, in a discussion Iâm having with them. I donât care nor is it my job to worry about it if it doesnât have anything to do with me and the discussion Iâm having.
I tried to do it nicely. My comments to you didnât entail a bunch of name calling, belittling, or snide remarks.It wasnât meant to attack you or be a âJerKâ. I just simply and respectfully said I chose not to engage because of the reason I gave. And it could have just been left at that. Because someone doesnât copy someone elseâs commentary or work on accident, right? So, it seems to me it would have been really simple to either just say, âyes, itâs true I forgot to quote a sourceâ, or even just leave it alone. No big deal really. Instead of denying it and then asking me why âI presumedâ. So, I simply responded with why I âknewâ.
And then to top it off, Skip tried to be the ever so kind and gracious person he is. By telling everyone involved, to just breath, start over, and move on. I think it was fairly obvious that it wasnât meant to be mean spirited to you. But, no, you two wanted to just continue on anyway. And sure I could have ignored the ongoing name calling and passive aggressive behaviour. In fact, I did, for awhile. Even let you guys have the last word thinking âitâs no big deal, itâs probably going to be done nowâ. But, then this above. So, enough is enough sometimes.
Iâm very sorry that you took what I said offensively. I did not intend to be mean or confrontational. And I apologise if it seemed that way.
But, hey, thatâs fine, you can deflect away from those really simple facts. And sure, feel free to keep name calling and making snide remarks and playing the victim. Iâm just not going to interact with either of the two of you again. Have a great week.
Actually, Mark, my original comment had nothing to do with you at all, it was, in fact totally referencing Skipâs purpose of this blog being to drill down to the INTENT of the original words of Scripture, and how our interaction reflected that.
I promise you, neither you nor the other âexchangeâ was nowhere in my brain when i made the statement.
However Esther is her business, but obviously, you have offended her (read: embarrassed, hurt, etc.) and until the above note, done nothing to make that better.
As far as my âpolicingâ others, i can only presume that you are referencing Craig, where i spoke up, repeatedly, and he only responded when a male said the same things as i had AND stated, as i did that if he felt that way others did. No offense to Craig, i like him, he just drowns people out, same as you feel i doâŠ.but differently.
Trust me, people have taken whole email exchanges between myself and them, memorized them, taught classes reciting my portion of the exchange and not only charged for the classes, charged for the CDâs and books created off of them.
I understand plagiarism.
If you had clarified yourself, initially, with the same touch of humility, all would have been well, but you were just as bullheaded as Ester, and i like Ester, you hurt her feelings. I have hurt alone, in front of a group of people who could see it and no one cared enough to speak on my behalf. it sux.
bcp,
Regarding âpolicing commentsâ, you may want to read Markâs comment more closely. The way I understand him, he was referring to Esterâs reference to the comment on the other thread (âBreatheâ) citing the hymn in full without attribution, with the idea that he cannot possibly try to âpoliceâ the âthousands of commentsâ on this blog.
His first two paragraphs were addressing Ester, the third addressed âeveryone involvedâ, which included you (despite your implicit assertion that it was an âobliqueâ reference) and me. I took Skipâs âhintâ, deciding not to engage further on this â until now, and only because this has been unnecessarily drawn out.
I think Mark summarized (as opposed to clarified) the events well in his 2nd paragraph, beginning with the 4th sentence (âI just simply and respectfully saidâŠâ). You can even blame me if you like, as Iâm the one who initially called it for what it plainly was â plagiarism (and copyright violation) â with Mark trying to soften that by stating: I wouldnât go that far with it. I doubt it was done with that type of intention. My only point was that I didnât want to debate with a third party I have no way of addressing. So, he did try to pepper this with grace.
Iâm baffled by your first two paragraphs in your comment @ February 6, 2017 11:06 am, in light of this (from comment @ February 2, 2017 10:53 am): Do feel free to use the quote AND be sure to give credit, footnote, bibliography, page number, date, number of posts down, etc.. Would NOT want you to be guilty of plagiarism or anything like that. If the content in italics is not hyperbolically referencing the discussion regarding plagiarism on the âWoodshed Workshopâ thread, then I just donât see your point in using it.
I have no idea what you mean here: âŠand he only responded when a male said the same things⊠First, Iâve no idea what you are referencing. Moreover, do you mean to imply that I would not have responded if it were a female? For the record, Iâm an equal opportunity responder.
Craig,
The first comment was a joke, and i have long since quit thinking about this whole deal. Itâs hard to be upset w/anyone too long, let alone someone i donât even know except online.
The second was a reference to a conversation that took place in december, that i found by happenstance an realized that the person was saying exactly as i had stated and seemingly had a better response.
Iâm really done with this, the only reason i am responding is because you specifically spoke to me and iâm not into snubbing people. If this really bugs you i will respond to you privately, but iâm done here.
My apologies to you if i offended you. And Mark.
Letâs walk our talk, forgive and live.
Re: hard to be upset to long
Clarification: If you are my ex-husband who has learned to torque Scripture to best suit your current needs and use it to slime everyone around you except yourself (being that you are the innocent victim of every woman you ever knew) i find i can be angry for an indeterminate length of time.
Cheers.
PS: If iâm directing a comment to you, i will state it, i do not do oblique interactions.
You said, âI donât care nor is it my job to worry about it if it doesnât have anything to do with me and the discussion Iâm having.â
I have replied before that you do NOT have to, nor were you obliged to respond to my comments! Read that again. I had NO discussions with you, you started it. You provoked it.
In future, THINK before you write, be more sensitive to othersâ feelings. Hope you have learnt your lesson!
Was that a hint of a threat when you used BEAR to intimidate? Thatâs how I read it!
Face it, you were unhappy with what I commented. You could not accept my view/paradigm, and decided to show me HOW MEAN you could be towards me, looking for faults.
Thatâs your Yetza hara working BIG time ! FACE it.
So joyful you no longer wish to interact with me (bcp can answer for herself).
SO, I can freely post comments contrary to your beliefs. (Applause)
Ester,
Earlier you had asked me, and perhaps others generally, to give you the benefit of the doubt. Absolutely; thatâs the best course of action, as blog comments can be written hastily. However, you lost credibility when, after Mark had made his statement about not interacting with one who used sources without providing attribution (whether you agree or not with his reasoning or his presumed underlying motive from your perspective is another thing entirely), and you responded to him by rhetorically asking why he would âPRESUMEâ you had done so, when you knew very well you had done so, rather than providing a reason, any reason, for having done so. Had you provided a reason, Iâd not have stated anything at all.
Then, after being caught with your hand in the cookie jar, you continued to eat that cookie, all the while pointing your finger at those whoâd pointed out your behavior â in other words, after you implicitly claimed you were not guilty (âWhat makes you PRESUME it was a âcopy and pasteâ from someone elseâs work?!â), rather than conceding, you went on the offense, deflecting (e.g.: âHowâs your reading, understanding ability, with all your âknowledgeâ?â). In view of all this, you want to accuse Mark of Yetza hara?
To both Ester and bcp,
From my perspective, I think Mark has shown remarkable restraint in view of the repeated ad hominem (âJERKâ, etc. â yes, both of you used this term). You may disagree, and thatâs fine.
And I should note, Markâs pointing out Esterâs use of material without providing attribution is not an incidence of ad hominem (which literally means to the person). Pointing out that one didnât cite a source is merely pointing out a fact. Name calling, however, is an example of ad hominem.
I find it disappointing that you both would continue on after Skipâs âsubtleâ hint on the âWoodshed Workshopâ thread, and I canât help pointing out the irony that this has continued into a new thread in which Skip has apologized for making a mistake.
Mark is the webmaster here, providing a service for all who read or contribute to this blog. While this certainly doesnât mean he should be immune from criticism, I think he at least deserves more respect â and the benefit of the doubt.
Skip, my apologies, I feel I need to finish this off. You said, â I AM THE ONLY ONE who should be personally attacked (and I get to delete those before they get posted).â
I felt targeted for that attack. I am still furious.
I am asking Mark, WHY others have done the same, in fact an entire HYMN, and not pointed out, whereas mine was.
At the time I asked if he presumed I âcopy and pasteâ as I honestly had not, not realizing I had indeed copied that Comment. It was not an article.
Mark was being offensive, intentional or otherwise. That smirk of âknow allâ just as Craigâs, was what came through in his attack. If that is not demeaning and offensive, what is?
Craig,
I am not at this blog for Markâs sake, I am here for Skipâs miinistry. If Mark thinks he needs to be respected for being the webmaster, no way.
No where have I seen a webmaster being allowed upfront to âtake chargeâ which appears to be.
End of story!
I ignored the error, sorry. I should have written along with Ginger. I suspect there are others out there like me.
Maybe all the rest of you were just being too kind to show me up.
Yes, if you had made a mathematical error I probably would have written!
Of that I have no doubt, my friend.
or perhaps; the rest of us had not been able to read it; or if so, had not had time to reply!
On a personal note; I am still in Houston; since Nov. 31, finally yesterday got clearance after all the mammoth physical testing that seemed to go way beyond necessity. But just this a.m. got informed the surgery was finally scheduled for Feb. 13. I am so glad that I did get here this trip with my lap top; my son/wife came first week from Tucson and set it up, etc. so I can use it. I have wanted to respond to several of the Post the past weeks; however; my daughter has kept me busy in her and husbandâs life. It is an extremely active one. So hopefully some time by the end of this month I will be back in my big old house that is four hours from here. Thanks for all that prayed for meâ
P.S. I had a new great-granddaughter born yesterday in Tucson. and adoption approved for two Chinese: and older girl, and two year old boy. They are not from the same sides of China. So that will make me 14 (fourteen Great-Grand Children). My middle daughter and husband will accompany the parents and two of their American born daughters with them to get the two adopted Chinese when the time comes.
With all the world going crazy in every area, and differences in Governments âgetting along with each otherââChina, may to decide to make it most difficult for these children to be released close together. I can do nothing except PRAY FOR THEM. I WOULD APPRECIATE ANY OF YOU THAT WOULD LIKE TO DO SO. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE
p.s. My grandson, the request I sent out a few weeks ago- a senior in Loyola U. Chicago ( but b. & raised in CA) is continuing on there. seems to be settled, and plans to graduate in May. His family, ( my youngest daughterâs) are planning to be there for him to graduate. His girlfriend will graduate the same day from Perdue. The families will all met the next day to get to know each other.
I guess you all know, what the current U.S. president has said to the Mayor of Chicago.â Let us all pray for our current U.S. situationâ that God Himself will bring Glory & Honor to His Wordâ and many will seek anew His FACE. What a day to live! Thanks for praying for my past requests, and all others that will ask and believe He does hear our prayers.
We read aloud together each morning, casting the webpage onto our TV, each taking an alternate paragraph. I donât know if I would have caught it had I read it alone, but I do remember wanting to go to the text to read the whole prophecy and not doing that. Perhaps weâd have realised then. I have the email, so I can compare now to check that niggled feeling.
My husband often wants me to forward the email to him, which I politely refuse to do, because of the support factor (I donate, he doesnât-our incomes are quite separate which he prefers). I have wondered why the website allows free access while the email requires donation.
There are other sites which allow a lesser access without support and a greater access to supporters. The personal integrity Skip creates with free access through the website does not go unnoticed, a different niggly feeling.
I have struggled with the support issue regarding the free website for a long time. I have avoided a membership fee. I might change my mind in the future but I donât want people to be turned away from the learning process simply because they feel that they donât want to pay to be members. Emails are different order Of involvement. I end up sending them out and have to maintain the lists and a separate server to do that. So itâs a dilemma. I havenât resolved it yet. Thanks for your input.
Maybe you could set up a two tiered system, the very oldest (and in my estimation, some of your best work) accessed for free and the newer on a pay by system.
Additionally, we could possibly donate to a pay by and contribute to a fund that allows others to access at a greatly reduced rate. I would never say âfreeâ because âfreeâ is rarely appreciated.
There are ways to contribute, that donât even include paypal (hint).
One of the offsets that Skip has set up is the ability to access Amazon through Amazon Smile that directs a percentage of purchases towards Skipâs support. I often fail to use the link on my desk top when purchasing something online by searching for the item in a search engine. Usually I end up at Amazon anyways and then fail to remember to use the Amazon Smile link and deprive Skip of that benefit. This could be one way for all of us if faithful to that method to offset the need to charge a membership fee.
Thanks, Richard. Amazon Smile is not a big percentage but it does make a difference.
Iâm three days late, but, arenât we mixing two stories? In Luke 1, the setting is Yochananâs bârit-milah, and Zacharias is the speaker. Mary and Joseph were not mentioned and Yeshua was not yet born. In Luke 2, â Shimâon took Yeshua in his arms and made a bârakhah to God, and saidâŠâŠâŠ.
Thank you, Skip, for being faithful to your calling.
Yes, as I said, I did mix up the stories. But the point about a single savior is still correct.
Skip to be honest I think I made the biggest blunder when I reiterated as if the story was about Simeonâs end. I should apologize to you and am grateful for Leslee for pointing out my mistake. Thank you for being so gracious towards my mess-up.
It looks like itâs time for me to make another comment here. I will be as direct as possible. I DO NOT expect or want a reply. This community is, as I said, self-correcting. That means each of us much ignore or overlook the possible personal comments that offend and consider them nothing more than the heat of the moment, often regretted later. It is unfortunate that some of these cannot be erased from the memory of the community, but they can be forgiven and left behind. NOW IT IS TIME TO DO THAT. Please, no more finger pointing, blame game, personal vindictive, or anything like that. This is a community of idea exchange and yes, because it is human we sometimes do things we would rather not. So, everyone, please be gentle and letâs move on to important matters. As far as I am concerned, this topic is CLOSED.