David Nusinow wrote: > Honestly, how bad is removing this message? Is removing this really > plagiarism? No, as credits will be given as due in the credits file. Right. Plagiarism would be replacing the credits with other credits, claiming to have written someone else's work. That word has no relevance whatsoever to this situation. Nobody's trying to take credit for Reiser's work. > Is > this bowlderization? Bowdler is a man who took Shakespeare and re-wrote > it to remove the sexual bits, trying to sterilize it. Somehow, I don't > think that's what's happening here in any fashion. Right again. Bowdlerization would be if we went through Reiser's code taking out all the sexual innuendos in the comments and variable names. Or maybe just changing all his recursions to loops in a fit of C-bigot anti-functional-programming mania. Has anyone done this? Of course not. Once again, the word has no relevance to this situation. > Is Hans' art as a > programmer really hanging on this piece of code? It's not like this > affects the ability of the program to function properly, and in fact > probably makes it function better in more cases. So it's not like this > move is hurting anyone's reputation. Of course not. Reiser is hurting his own reputation with infantile, irrational behavior like these accusations more than anyone could hurt him by trying to "plagiarise" or "bowdlerize" his work. Craig
Attachment:
pgpKEwhrQRv0J.pgp
Description: PGP signature