On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2012-11-24 12:04 AM MR wrote:
Can you take this personal argument off the list, please?
It is not a personal argument. It is a matter of principal
The way you are presenting this and attacking the author and the
On 11/24/2012 02:41 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
On 2012-11-24 1:14 AM Jay Lozier wrote:
On 11/24/2012 01:23 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
It is not a personal argument. It is a matter of principal
What principal?
Principle. Stupid typo.
Taking someone's work without giving attribution for it is
:)
From: MR mrzen...@gmail.com
To: Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com
Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Saturday, 24 November 2012, 17:40
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: 3 new very large English dictionaries
are now online
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Larry
FYI, I think Tom has also indicated that these are also available on the
extensions site.
Tom: Thanks for this as well as the work you do on the EN DVD. Awesome!
Cheers,
Marc
Le 2012-11-23 11:56, webmaster-Kracked_P_P a écrit :
I just finished uploading the new dictionaries and edited the
...@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Friday, 23 November 2012, 19:33
Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: 3 new very large English dictionaries are
now online
FYI, I think Tom has also indicated that these are also available on the
extensions site.
Tom: Thanks for this as well as the work you do on the EN DVD. Awesome
This is useless as a spell checker. It has both US and Canadian spelling for
many words.
o vs. ou, -ise vs. -ize. Double l vs. single l when adding suffixes. Use of s or c in
spelling.
Absolutely useless for checking the spelling of documents. A Canadian English dictionary
should have only
-users] Re: 3 new very large English dictionaries are
now online
FYI, I think Tom has also indicated that these are also available on the
extensions site.
Tom: Thanks for this as well as the work you do on the EN DVD. Awesome!
Cheers,
Marc
Le 2012-11-23 11:56, webmaster-Kracked_P_P a écrit
On 2012-11-23 3:07 PM webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:
A poster has stated that there may be problems with the Canadian dictionary. Something about
some specific word spellings that they do not think is pure Canadian words, but American
word spellings. For my part, I did not choose the words in
On 23/11/2012 at 22:27, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:
Since you do not give credit to your sources you are guilty of plagiarism.
I believe that you really can't plagiarize language. These are just words.
They are common good (or public domain, if you prefer more strict term).
But
On 2012-11-23 4:01 PM Mirosław Zalewski wrote:
On 23/11/2012 at 22:27, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:
Since you do not give credit to your sources you are guilty of plagiarism.
I believe that you really can't plagiarize language. These are just words.
They are common good (or
You cannot own a copyright on words or your language.
You copyright the order they are used in a document.
The published definition type of dictionaries copyright the text of
their definitions, and not the words themselves. You copyright War and
Peace but not the words used in that very
On 24/11/2012 at 00:01, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:
Every book, essay, article, etc. written is just words.
Copyrighted are not words per se, but very specific order of these that creates
unique work. And, going further, ideas submitted in these words.
Or ideas in general, since
On 2012-11-23 5:20 PM webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:
Now please do not call someone guilty of plagiarism unless you have proof of that act and
not just opinions.
You have admitted taking word lists from multiple sources without giving attribution to the
sources. That is plagiarism.
Your
Can you take this personal argument off the list, please?
You are wrong about what constitutes plagiarism, and this is now
completely off topic.
Thank you.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2012-11-23 5:20 PM webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:
Now
On 2012-11-24 12:04 AM MR wrote:
Can you take this personal argument off the list, please?
It is not a personal argument. It is a matter of principal
You are wrong about what constitutes plagiarism, and this is now
completely off topic.
Taking someone's work without giving attribution for
On 11/24/2012 01:23 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
On 2012-11-24 12:04 AM MR wrote:
Can you take this personal argument off the list, please?
It is not a personal argument. It is a matter of principal
What principal?
You are wrong about what constitutes plagiarism, and this is now
completely off
On 2012-11-24 1:14 AM Jay Lozier wrote:
On 11/24/2012 01:23 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
It is not a personal argument. It is a matter of principal
What principal?
Principle. Stupid typo.
Taking someone's work without giving attribution for it is plagiarism. Period
I think you do not what
17 matches
Mail list logo
