Amy did KSP!

[mikegarrison]

Von Braun in particular is quite controversial. He was a member of the party, and also the SS. His rockets were made by slave labor, and he had to have known that because he observed conditions at the factory. But the US wanted his rockets after the war, so all of this was pretty much ignored. It wasn't unnoticed, though. For instance, in 1964's Dr. Strangelove the title character is an obvious satirical reference to the US's acceptance of German scientists.

I don't blame Von Braun for building V2s -- my grandfather built B-17s that dropped bombs on Germany. It's his ambiguous and troubling record regarding slave labor that is more of a problem.

[Tourist]

Von Braun in particular is quite controversial. He was a member of the party, and also the SS. His rockets were made by slave labor, and he had to have known that because he observed conditions at the factory. But the US wanted his rockets after the war, so all of this was pretty much ignored. It wasn't unnoticed, though. For instance, in 1964's Dr. Strangelove the title character is an obvious satirical reference to the US's acceptance of German scientists.

I don't blame Von Braun for building V2s -- my grandfather built B-17s that dropped bombs on Germany. It's his ambiguous and troubling record regarding slave labor that is more of a problem.

Its true, there are some question marks over Von Braun. My understanding was he joined the SS more for political reasons, in that his membership may assist the program. I also believe he did admit that the conditions in the factories that made the rockets were despicable. Arguably he'd have been shot if he'd protested. Not that we now accept (or should accept) "I was just following orders" or its variations as a defence. He also had a rocky relationship with (elements of the regime) I believe he was arrested by the Gestapo a couple of times. Of course, these stories may be a bit of image repair post facto.

I suppose the question is how deeply do you need to acquiesce with the actions of a despicable regime before rehabilitation though your positive contributions is impossible. An average German citizen, maybe even a soldier (but not SS) surely should be required to accept very little collective guilt for the regime, but the higher up you get, the more you know and the more you benefit, the more blame should be accepted.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Tourist

[ModZero]

easy on the eyes

It's kinda disappointing to read this kind of comment about someone on this forum, it's usually above this sort of thing.

In contrast, the motif of plagiarism is far more relevant  she does profit from it, including deals where she works directly with NASA and such. It's actually more of a systemic problem (I mean, we have entire websites - like Imgur and 9gag - that live off uncredited work of others, often putting way less of their own work into it than she does), and she probably thought in terms of "eh, too much hassle to add all the credits and nobody will read them" as many other bloggers and internet journalists do, but that doesn't really excuse it. People who did the original work deserve credit, and it can have actual impact on their own careers as well.

[The_Rocketeer]

It's kinda disappointing to read this kind of comment about someone on this forum, it's usually above this sort of thing.

Oh jeez, you'd think someone had said she needed to get off the internet and go back in the kitchen...

You think if she was unattractive she'd have such a big fanbase on youtube or *anywhere*? Facts be facts, let's not pretend that acknowledging ...-appeal is the same thing as misogyny or anything unhealthy at all.

[Dafni]

Oh jeez, you'd think someone had said she needed to get off the internet and go back in the kitchen...

You think if she was unattractive she'd have such a big fanbase on youtube or *anywhere*? Facts be facts, let's not pretend that acknowledging ...-appeal is the same thing as misogyny or anything unhealthy at all.

I agree 100%

[ModZero]

You think if she was unattractive she'd have such a big fanbase on youtube or *anywhere*?

Yes. In fact, I'm pretty sure not everyone of her fans are into her, regardless how unimaginable it might be to you that others might not only not share your taste, but would also rather avoid even knowing your taste in this regard.

Oh jeez, you'd think someone had said she needed to get off the internet and go back in the kitchen...

Well, you just said her looks are the reason for her popularity, so pretty much, yes.

Anyhow, that's it for me, I'm not really interested in having this particular creepy discussion yet another time, as it usually goes the same way, including pretending that you have facts. Didn't want to leave it without anyone pointing out that this isn't exactly universally accepted behaviour.

[The_Rocketeer]

Yes. In fact, I'm pretty sure not everyone of her fans are into her, regardless how unimaginable it might be to you that others might not only not share your taste, but would also rather avoid even knowing your taste in this regard.

Well, you just said her looks are the reason for her popularity, so pretty much, yes.

Anyhow, that's it for me, I'm not really interested in having this particular creepy discussion yet another time, as it usually goes the same way, including pretending that you have facts. Didn't want to leave it without anyone pointing out that this isn't exactly universally accepted behaviour.

I could take exception to your personal remarks about my 'tastes', but frankly I can't be bothered.

It doesn't matter whether anyone here is actually physically attracted to her, the fact is she is healthy, good-looking and young, and her youtube success is almost certainly related to that fact, regardless of her gender or what you or I or anybody thinks. Scott Manley is also healthy and relatively young, if less good-looking, but then he has a quaint accent and he's bloody good at KSP, which Amy's not.

Edit: If the plagiarism allegations are true, it turns out she's not particularly good at making legit online videos either.

This isn't a soap-box for feminist ideals, and it doesn't need to be an ethical debate just because she's a woman and someone said she was pretty. Youtube is fundamentally a popularity contest, not a meritocracy - well, not unless you count being good at being popular.

Edited September 23, 2015 by The_Rocketeer

[Albert II]

Interesting. I have never heard of Albert or this space monkey program. I do have an inherent fear of parachuting though.

[CloudlessEchoes]

It's kinda disappointing to read this kind of comment about someone on this forum, it's usually above this sort of thing.

It's my theory as to why she can have zero journalistic integrity (and rip off well known people in the field who have been doing it longer than she's been alive) and still have a lucrative career on youtube etc. There are far better sources for the information she is putting out there (the sources she ripped it from to start with). If you don't think a high percentage of her online hits are people who are somewhat attracted to her I have a bridge to sell you.

[NecroBones]

I... uhm... I don't know what to think now. I've always thought Amy was great, and have been following her youtube channel closely for a while now. I hadn't heard about the plagiarism accusations until it was mentioned in this thread. And now that I've seen it, I just have to say, if it's true then that is extremely disappointing.

I mean, lifting a sentence here or there isn't a huge deal, as there are only so many ways to say the same thing. But when entire article structures and content are replicated, with minor editing, that's a different story. I haven't seen proof, and it's not my place to make judgment. But I'll just say again: If it's true, then I'm very disappointed.

[Johnny Wishbone]

I mean, lifting a sentence here or there isn't a huge deal, as there are only so many ways to say the same thing. But when entire article structures and content are replicated, with minor editing, that's a different story. I haven't seen proof, and it's not my place to make judgment. But I'll just say again: If it's true, then I'm very disappointed.

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/1

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/2

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/3

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/4

[mikegarrison]

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/1

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/2

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/3

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2394/4

Some of those are a bit underwhelming. There are only so many ways you can phrase "failed to make orbit", for instance. But on the whole, it certainly looks like the Air and Space Magazine was the (uncredited) original source.

Part of the issue is a culture clash. Many bloggers who aren't formally trained in journalism don't even think about formally listing sources and the like. But there is no doubt that they should. And she's well past the stage of just being an amateur blogger. Professional journalists can have their careers ended over just a single case of plagiarism. But sometimes it's hard to convince people that just they can't do this when they grew up "sharing" music files, "sharing" video games, "sharing" jpegs on their websites, etc.

[GoSlash27]

Funny... I ran across this comment on one of the articles:

I downloaded a copy of Ms. Teitel's original article when it was first published and thought it would be interesting to run it through plagiarism detection software to test out Messrs. Kennedy and Day's analysis, particularly since they used small sections of long articles as opposed to complete texts. Given that they would benefit from having Teitel's article removed, thereby driving more traffic to their article, it seems that unbiased analysis could provide some perspective. If "she copied, pasted, and partially rewrote our entire article" as Kennedy and Day suggest, then plagiarism software would easily detect this. SafeAssign is one of the academic standards for detecting plagiarism in universities, and it does a good job comparing submissions to a large swath of sites on the internet. SafeAssign detected 0% plagiarism from Teitel's article. Other plagiarism programs report that less than 10% of Teitel's article has significant overlap with other online sources, and these instances relate to historical facts.

Full comparison of the articles in question reveals minimal overlap between these texts, thereby calling into question Kennedy and Day's analysis of Teitel as a plagiarist.

A few further comments that merit consideration before sweeping generalizations are made against Teitel. 1) She works for a wide range of popular online science outlets that have significant editorial oversight. Legitimate plagiarism, which is different from incidental overlap in describing historical facts, would likely not be tolerated. 2) Including detailed bibliographies is not the standard in science and history blogging. 3) Given that Teitel has written hundreds or thousands of articles, Kennedy and Day's implication that she is a career plagiarist based on a few instances of overlap removed from the context of the entire articles in question is perhaps premature.

So there's that. Make of it what you will...

Best,

-Slashy

[NecroBones]

Funny... I ran across this comment on one of the articles:

<snip>

So there's that. Make of it what you will...

That does make me feel a little better. Thanks,

[CloudlessEchoes]

Some of those are a bit underwhelming. There are only so many ways you can phrase "failed to make orbit", for instance. But on the whole, it certainly looks like the Air and Space Magazine was the (uncredited) original source

They all have directly copied sentences, or parts of sentences. They're put together in the same way, in the same order. This type of thing would probably get you expelled from a college.

As for the software comparison, it's just a tool that looks for similarities and it only looks against things in it's database. If the original sources isn't there, it isn't matching it, or if the sentences are re-written enough it wouldn't see it. Plagiarism is a huge problem on college campuses so a software solution is a good first pass at catching the lazier examples.

Anyway I'm done arguing it, if people want to support this type of person with clicks so be it!

Necrobones: love your mods!

[Captain Vlad]

They all have directly copied sentences, or parts of sentences. They're put together in the same way, in the same order. This type of thing would probably get you expelled from a college.

I looked through those. Given that nearly all of it was historical or technical information, at least the largest portions I looked at, it doesn't fit the definition of plagiarism in my opinion. She could have easily written the portions I saw solely by checking whatever source material the offended author used. Did she use the article as a reference? Only she knows for sure, but even if she did, there's no real way anyone else could prove it (unless they made a mistake she also copied that wasn't present in the source material).

If the original sources isn't there, it isn't matching it, or if the sentences are re-written enough it wouldn't see it.

If it doesn't match the original article and the sentences are re-written enough that the plagiarism software didn't see it, mostly likely it doesn't fit the legal definition of plagiarism when you're dealing with information she could've gotten somewhere other than the offended author. I don't see anything in the above examples where she repeated any original ideas or interpretations of the other author, which would've been more telling.

The portion in GoSlash's quoted bit about editorial oversight she would've been under are also rather significant.

If people want to support this type of person with clicks so be it!

If the above examples constitute the bulk of the "evidence" that she's stealing people's articles, I have far, far, FAR more suspicion of poor intent regarding the people claiming she copied their material given that, from what I've seen, the "case" against her is quite underwhelming as Mike said.

And I subscribed, having never seen one of her videos before. She presents interesting information on lots of interesting things in an entertaining fashion.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Captain Vlad

[GoSlash27]

She could have easily written the portions I saw solely by checking whatever source material the offended author used. Did she use the article as a reference? Only she knows for sure, but even if she did, there's no real way anyone else could prove it (unless they made a mistake she also copied that wasn't present in the source material).

This was what was running through my mind this morning on my way to work. Correlation <> causation, yada yada. When relating historical material, it's totally natural to express the logical chain of historical events in an eerily similar fashion. Did she get that train of thought from this article, or did they both get the same train of thought from a third common source? How on Earth would anybody know that?

It seems likely to me that either she had drawn heavily from this article or else the material it was based on and came to the same conclusions, *but* her story follows a sufficiently different path from theirs to lead me to think that it wasn't merely a cut 'n' paste hack job.

So IMO screw it. Her storytelling is fun and engaging while theirs is dry and academic. If they ever happen to cobble together a cheesy rocket in KSP and launch it in order to recreate an obscure piece of space history, I'll be sure to watch it.

Best,

-Slashy

[Moach]

It's kinda disappointing to read this kind of comment about someone on this forum, it's usually above this sort of thing.

In contrast, the motif of plagiarism is far more relevant  she does profit from it, including deals where she works directly with NASA and such. It's actually more of a systemic problem (I mean, we have entire websites - like Imgur and 9gag - that live off uncredited work of others, often putting way less of their own work into it than she does), and she probably thought in terms of "eh, too much hassle to add all the credits and nobody will read them" as many other bloggers and internet journalists do, but that doesn't really excuse it. People who did the original work deserve credit, and it can have actual impact on their own careers as well.

Oh jeez, you'd think someone had said she needed to get off the internet and go back in the kitchen...

You think if she was unattractive she'd have such a big fanbase on youtube or *anywhere*? Facts be facts, let's not pretend that acknowledging ...-appeal is the same thing as misogyny or anything unhealthy at all.

I agree 100%

[reaction] WHAT MADNESS IS THIS?!! [/reaction]

Allow me to moderate....

Please, let us quit it now, while we're (scarcely) ahead of now inevitable horrific-gruesome-disaster-doom-brutal-death-murder -- this is a textbook example of escalating forum warfare and well, given how rapidly these things tend to devolve into caveman-type manners -- I shall now end this Fire Hazard of a thread before anyone loses an eyeball and/or naively rested limb

May The Force be with us!

started good... turned bad... must end before "ugly"

and no, trust me -- there's no recovering from here... this thread is deep stalled below minimums

Edited September 25, 2015 by Moach