Contract Cheating

cboard.cprogramming.com is listed #7 on list of sites/forums that actively support "contract cheating". Which term you can google for lots of examples.

Robert Clarke, Thomas Lancaster and (I believe) Sandi Kirkham publish and update this list. If I understand correctly, the list is used to aid in searching for cheating, and the list is actively circulated.

Those folks are faculty here:
Academic Staff

I think the cboards are a good forum - Maybe one of the mods here can contact Robert Clarke et al. And see if a rule change here is enforceable or even worth the effort.

Well, it lists blogsearch... which is a search engine. How can that be contract cheating? That'd surely be means of getting answers. And it doesn't list google codesearch. I think the list needs to define what it's listing better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

cboard.cprogramming.com is listed #7 on list of sites/forums that actively support "contract cheating".

---

The heading of that list reads "List of sites associated with 'contract cheating'". What does "associated" mean? If we interpret it to mean "actively support contract cheating", then that list is incorrect, since the homework guidelines strongly discourage members from doing other people's homework.

If we interpret it to mean "support contract cheating", then including cboard on that list is reasonable: a student can use PMs to form a contract with some member to complete the student's homework, and PMs are not monitored. (Or so we would like you to believe :p)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

If I understand correctly, the list is used to aid in searching for cheating, and the list is actively circulated.

---

If you are talking about cheating in general, then that is fine. It certainly is the case that students attempt to use cboard to cheat, and they may succeed. It is to our advantage for such students to get punished for cheating as we can then help those who really take the effort to learn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

Maybe one of the mods here can contact Robert Clarke et al. And see if a rule change here is enforceable or even worth the effort.

---

What rule change do you suggest? We already have a homework policy.

This list is hilarious. By contract cheating, I assume people are getting paid for doing others homework. While that is not impossible here through collusion, we ranked 110 spots higher than rentacoder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

we ranked 110 spots higher than rentacoder.

---

Actually, that list is in alphabetical order according to URL.

Yawn. I can't imagine something I care less about.

I'm not suggesting anything. I am a mod on another site -we are being removed from the list because we demonstrated that we have always actively blocked homework and have a zero tolerance for it.

I read kermi3's homework post. It doesn't appear to be enforced....

This thread is homework, it says it is in the title:
http://cboard.cprogramming.com/cplus...ssignment.html

My point is that being on a list like that is probably not a winning strategy for any forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

I read kermi3's homework post. It doesn't appear to be enforced....

This thread is homework, it says it is in the title:
Corrections on School assignment...

---

Neither hk_mp5kpdw, matsp, nor brewbuck have spoonfeed an answer to hubris.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

My point is that being on a list like that is probably not a winning strategy for any forum.

---

Why not? If the point is to deter students from using this as a place to ask to be spoonfed homework answers, I'd say bring it on. I would be happy to know that instructors are looking through these forums to police against cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

I'm not suggesting anything. I am a mod on another site -we are being removed from the list because we demonstrated that we have always actively blocked homework and have a zero tolerance for it.

I read kermi3's homework post. It doesn't appear to be enforced....

This thread is homework, it says it is in the title:
http://cboard.cprogramming.com/cplus...ssignment.html

My point is that being on a list like that is probably not a winning strategy for any forum.

---

Can you explain what is wrong in that particular thread? I certainly haven't told the OP what he should do - other than correct the indentation and explain some suspicious looking lines of code. And I don't think anyone else has either, but I haven't actually looked at it the last few minutes.

There is a big difference between HELPING someone to solve the problem on their own, and solving the problem FOR them. Clearly, the latter is wrong, and whilst it may not be actively policed, it is certainly frowned upon.

--
Mats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

I'm not suggesting anything. I am a mod on another site -we are being removed from the list because we demonstrated that we have always actively blocked homework and have a zero tolerance for it.

I read kermi3's homework post. It doesn't appear to be enforced....

---

There's no ban on discussing homework here. The homework policy, if I can boil it down, is simply that the student needs to write the code him/herself, and we will comment on it and help work through issues. Occassionally, some bonehead posts an entire solution and is appropriately scolded.

You know, like in the real world where people can use their mouths to speak with each other?

If receiving this sort of help goes against the policies of the instructor, then it seems there is a problem between the instructor and the student which needs to be addressed. I'm not particularly interested in enforcing or even learning about policies which have nothing to do with me.

Quote:

---

My point is that being on a list like that is probably not a winning strategy for any forum.

---

In what sense? Anybody can make any sort of list they like.

I went to university, I loved it, and I would never trash the concept, but a formal institution should not never, never be touted as the only place to learn*. These people obviously would prefer to restrict everyone's educational opportunities and have not given any thought to the potential consequences of their witch hunt. The idea that cboard is some kind of hotspot where kids come to pay for an essay or assignment or whatever is beyond ridiculous. Anyone who wants to spend ten minutes looking around will figure that out.

You might as well throw your mind in the garbage as take this tish seriously. And I bet most professors would agree with what I am saying. But there are crackpots in academia -- perhaps these busybodies are some of them? Surely their (paid) time would be better spent in more serious pursuits (unless they are the kind of academics not taken seriously by their peers, and so are left with nothing better to do).

Cboard is a great resource. Not *everyone* learning here is a college student, and not everyone who comes here looking for advice, or flat out answers and solutions, is a CS 101 student in disguise. If a university (or all the universities) want to provide all the funding, staff, and other resources, then they can call all the shots, and hopefully try and make up for the corresponding harm done to the education of people who aren't in university (like, we can't discuss programming on the web now without being overseen by a board of regents?). In all honesty, if anything like that comes to pass I WILL SUE EVERYONE INVOLVED IN A COURT OF LAW. But I presume/hope that is not the real intent (although it's hard to say what the purpose of the list is otherwise...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewbuck

Occassionally, some bonehead posts an entire solution and is appropriately scolded.

---

I've had this happen more than once and I still don't care and don't agree with your premises or your interpretation. I do understand why the moderators should not make it a practice. You know what would really ruin the board -- forcing the moderators to tell people they have crossed the line by divulging too much information about c programming, on an advice forum for c programmers. I've never been offered for money** and usually ignore (that kind of) pm because I don't see a need for secrecy.



* I also would never deny that it was a tremendous privilege to go to school, and that universities are undeniably places of privilege. This is flat out disgusting, elitist crap and I also honestly hope they carpool off a bridge somewhere. Scum.
** now that would be funny

>>In what sense? Anybody can make any sort of list they like.

That's what I was thinking, this is an arbitrary list with over a hundred forums related to programming. If you were to ask me I could guess that there are less than 30 or less well populated programming communities on the web.

Where's the proof, the research, the data on why and how these sites are the top at contract cheating.

I've heard it argued that the rampant cheating in CS devalues the meaning of the CS degree for those who actually worked hard for it.

Well, that may be true, but so what? CS isn't special in terms of student cheating. Perhaps it's easier to see, and quantify, the amount of cheating. In these Google days, any professor or instructor can go Google a few choice phrases from a student paper and instantly detect plagiarism.

"Ack! Plagiarism and cheating are on the rise, and Google proves it!"

Uh, no. That's always been the case. We just couldn't see it before we had Google.

So suppose the value of the CS degree is so hindered that nobody takes it seriously anymore, and just bases their hiring decisions on pure merit. Fine with me.

I went to school to study, not get a degree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indigo0086

Where's the proof, the research, the data on why and how these sites are the top at contract cheating.

---

Even if there was "contract" cheating happening here, how would we know? People don't normally conduct that kind of business in the open. I'd bet that if you reviewed the last three years of comments, you would not see a single deal being closed here to exchange code for money. I certainly can't think of one.

I don't really know what this list means to us... I don't see any problem with teachers snooping around this site to try and pin out people from their class looking for solutions. In fact, I support the idea. However, if one of their students does genuinely come here without doing any work asking for a handout all the teacher will find is a series or replies either flaming the OP or simply directing them to the homework guidelines topic. So, the teacher is happy having caught his/her student, the board is exonerated of any "contract cheating" libel, in at least one teacher's eyes, and the student gets his just deserts.

It's not like they're going to shut the forum down or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewbuck

I'd bet that if you reviewed the last three years of comments, you would not see a single deal being closed here to exchange code for money. I certainly can't think of one.

---

I couldn't guarantee that for every one of the 308 topics in this forum, but I'd imagine if you were to go in that forum and look at every topic you might also find one or more incidences where students attempted to pass homework off as a job they were willing to pay for only to be shut down by members as homework is obviously homework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim mcnamara

I'm not suggesting anything. I am a mod on another site -we are being removed from the list because we demonstrated that we have always actively blocked homework and have a zero tolerance for it.

---

Pathetic -- all the little wannabe fascist twerps can use your site then. You can even call it the "No Advice" forum, for morons.

I'd love to hear what these "professors" would have to say if I got some group of insane fundamentalists together and came up with a reason to curtail their freedom of speech. Like, you should not be allowed to teach computer science period because the computers are instruments of satan and are abherrations according to Creation Theory.

But great for you jim -- why don't you bend over and show 'em the other cheek.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

I've had this happen more than once and I still don't care and don't agree with your premises or your interpretation. I do understand why the moderators should not make it a practice. You know what would really ruin the board -- forcing the moderators to tell people they have crossed the line by divulging too much information about c programming, on an advice forum for c programmers. I've never been offered for money** and usually ignore (that kind of) pm because I don't see a need for secrecy.

---

Handing over an entire solution is no more "divulging information" than giving somebody an encyclopedia in response to a question. Code isn't information (well, it is, but that's not what I'm talking about). The information is knowledge resident in somebody's brain. Obviously, exchanging information as widely as possible is a good thing. I just don't think raw code is a good medium for that exchange.

I'm not in favor of any kind of enforcement against people who post homework solutions. I just have to wonder why they do it.

I certainly wasn't thinking about you, MK27, when I wrote my comment. I wasn't aware that had ever happened to you -- I was thinking more about the new users with low post counts who post solutions (for "street cred?" I don't know)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

This list is hilarious. By contract cheating, I assume people are getting paid for doing others homework. While that is not impossible here through collusion, we ranked 110 spots higher than rentacoder.

---

Which supports the very real possibility that these are "profs" who are mostly interesting in roadblocking education generally. Those exist, you can take classes from them too. However, IMO academia is an international realm and the people tend to have an idea of who is who, so I bet you this list is not widely circulated or taken seriously.

A great move would be for someone "with pull and knowledge" to contact a CS faculty willing to to stand up and say they are ethically opposed to this list and it's premises and methods.

[edit] hmm, this list is in alphabetical order, whiteflags. Are you just trying to upset me?

I have been known to post some sort of solution to a problem. But it is then written in obfuscated C/C++, and if the student actually uses that for the homework submission, then it will be fairly obviuous that it wasn't written by a new student.

http://pastebin.com/ ??
I mean, obviously, it would be possible to find source code in pastebin, but how is it "contract cheating"?

--
Mats

Eh, MK27, I have pointed out that it is a misconception to think that the numerical ranking has any significance. If we were located at zcboard.cprogramming.com instead, we would be last on that list since it lists the URLs in alphabetical order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

A great move would be for someone "with pull and knowledge" to contact a CS faculty willing to to stand up and say they are ethically opposed to this list and it's premises and methods.

---

Supposed the heading of the list was changed to "websites that students approach to ask for homework answers". Would you then object to such a list?

The only thing bad about that list is that it borders on libel since it claims that this community engages in contracts to help students cheat when we do no such thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laserlight

The only thing bad about that list is that it borders on libel since it claims that this community engages in contracts to help students cheat when we do no such thing.

---

Indeed, it's a serious charge. People have sued for a lot less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewbuck

Handing over an entire solution is no more "divulging information" than giving somebody an encyclopedia in response to a question. Code isn't information

---

Part of what I mean by disagreeing with the premise. It may not be the best way to demonstrate something, but it seems totally valid and useful to me.

Also, if someone is really looking for a solution and you have it, why not give it to them? It seems wrong to be paranoid about it because you are afraid you might be doing someone's homework for them. Everyone knows you will learn more figuring it out by yourself, but there is also a reason we don't code everything in asm.

Quote:

---

I certainly wasn't thinking about you, MK27, when I wrote my comment. I wasn't aware that had ever happened to you -- I was thinking more about the new users with low post counts who post solutions (for "street cred?" I don't know)

---

I don't mind at all hearing from someone when they think I have just written someone else's assignment. It definitely has happened more than once. But I cannot take the argument, etc, very seriously either. I doubt that many of my "answers" made it verbatim into someone's homework (I don't intend that), but if they did I could care less. Why should my priorities be curtailed because of the priorities of Prof. Stalin, et al.? What have they done for me lately? I don't see any "ethical playing field" there AT ALL.

I learned C (at least partially) at cboard, and one of the major ways I did that was to flat out take homework assignments and do some element of it "for them" (of course, it wasn't for them, it was mostly for me). There's a lot of value to repeatedly solving similar "problems" to improve your knowledge of syntax. I should almost apply for credits ;)

Just to clarify, in case Prof Stalin has some faculty computer running a scan bot in his maniacal efforts to squash the anarchy at cprogramming dot com and I will be to blame for all of it or get banned, I do treat people who say they are doing homework differently because I do agree homework serves a purpose and should be approached that way. I never cheated in school, but I would always discuss material with anyone interested. HOWEVER, my priority is other people whom I perceive to be in the same boat as me: they are learning without the benefit of an institution, and I think it is *very* important to help one another as much as possible. In that context, the idea of "cheating" just doesn't make sense or bare thinking about. At all. There is no way I would withhold from such a person on the suspicion that they *might* be trying to cheat at their school of choice.

@laserlight -- yay, I haven't actually looked at it, I guess I shouldn't have taken the word of whiteflags for granted. Wow, this has really got me heated up. Still, I don't think the majority of university professors would take this "blacklisting" style idea seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

It may not be the best way to demonstrate something, but it seems totally valid and useful to me.

Also, if someone is really looking for a solution and you have it, why not give it to them?

---

Because people tend to learn better when they come up with a solution themselves, say after some hints and related examples. You can always show them a "model answer" after they have come up with their own best attempt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

It seems wrong to be paranoid about it because you are afraid you might be doing someone's homework for them.

---

Even if the question is not homework per se, it can be seen as self-assigned homework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

Everyone knows you will learn more figuring it out by yourself, but there is also a reason we don't code everything in asm.

---

I am afraid that I do not follow your argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laserlight

I am afraid that I do not follow your argument.

---

Re: why we don't code in asm (or binary)? I don't know a stitch of it, so in a very real sense, I am cheating myself out of knowledge by using the C language and a C compiler, which does many nice things for me so that I can spend my time more productively. Or spouting off here :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

Re: why we don't code in asm (or binary)? I don't know a stitch of it, so in a very real sense, I am cheating myself out of knowledge by using the C language and a C compiler, which does many nice things for me so that I can spend my time more productively. Or spouting off here :o

---

Hardly the same thing.

It wouldn't surprise me if many teachers find a student seeking legitimate help (showing code and all) as cheating.

It speaks more about those teachers than it does about our forums.

>> I am a mod on another site -we are being removed from the list because we demonstrated
>> that we have always actively blocked homework and have a zero tolerance for it.

I post on tek-tips.com occasionally. I'm not sure if that's the site you refer to, but it sounds similar. The homework policy on that site is a "zero-tolerance" policy, but it is hardly something to strive to duplicate. Beyond the fact that the enforced policy is different than the stated one (at least it was the last time I checked), I think the enforced policy goes way too far. I can understand it in some sense for a site dedicated to professionals as that one is, but following the same rules here would almost entirely remove the value of this site.

There is a difference between allowing students to ask questions related to homework and allowing students to get solutions for their homework. And while I think that more could be done here to make the amount of assistance given acceptable, I think following the example of tek-tips and completely ignoring that difference would be a horrible idea.

How was the list compiled?

I know for a fact that some members say they'll do their homework if they PM them, but instead run them around the bush :-)

I want to be off the list just so we don't have to deal with wave after wave of lazy students who come here asking the same stupid questions hiding behind the same stupid posts.

But overall I could care less what the list says. I have never seen a post where money was exchanged in return for completed homework. In fact when this is offered quite the opposite happens and then most of our core members give the OP a royal thrashing that they will not soon forget.

Keep in mind that these types of posts are often mass-posted across many many boards so I fail to see how we turned up on the list other than we are a site dedicated to assisting with C/C++. Looks like the peope who compiled the list just googled for programming help sites and then alphabetized the results. But in the end I really believe this is one battle not worth fighting and we should go about our business. Who cares about that list? Keep in mind it is so popular...yet none of us knew about it until this thread.

Quote:

---

I read kermi3's homework post. It doesn't appear to be enforced....

---

Yet you are from another site and you have deduced that we do not enforce the homework policy? Seems a bit arrogant. There is nothing in that thread that is 'contract cheating.' Rather the members helped the student through the problem and had them post their own code. If we cannot make recommendations to students about their code then you are basically saying they must learn everything in class from their professor. Your statement about the homework policy not being enforced is absurd as is offering that thread as proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewbuck

Yawn. I can't imagine something I care less about.

---

I tried, and the only thing I came up with was a closeup of a woman giving oral pleasure to a guy in 'movies'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zacs7

I know for a fact that some members say they'll do their homework if they PM them, but instead run them around the bush :-)

---

That episode did kick butt:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quanonymous

Let this be a lesson to you -- in ethics!! And if you ever come crying around here again, I'll track your IP, call my nearest cousin and get that $20 put where the sun will never shine -- between your cheatin' ears!!!

---

Love you guys

When did it become the responsibility of the internet and its denizens to vet students? If a student demeans themself by cheating then that is between them and their conscience. If an institution gives a degree to a student without effectively ensuring that the student has attained the level required of them then that is the fault of the institution - the buck starts and stops with them when it comes to the quality of their education and the quality of their graduates.

I think it is a serious slur to accuse sites of "contract cheating" - especially due to the oxymoronic nature of the term. The only way you can cheat a contract is by breaching a term of the contract. If you are contracted to write some code or provide a solution and you fulfil that remit then you are not participating in contract cheating. If you take some money to do something, and you don't do it, then you are contract cheating.

These people need a reality check. And "widely distributed" is not defined as "passed around some students on campus". The whole thing is a complete waste of time and if I was the site admin here I would be demanding that the site be removed from the list.

Alternatively we could compile a list of the most pointless and uninformative lists - this "Contract Cheating" list being #1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

The whole thing is a complete waste of time and if I was the site admin here I would be demanding that the site be removed from the list.

---

I think that it was rather unfortunate that jim mcnamara posted a version of that list that explained nothing about what inclusion meant. Poking around Robert Clarke's faculty's student resource website, I found a page on a Contract Cheating Workshop. At the bottom of that page is a link to an updated version of the said list.

This updated list includes a disclaimer:

Quote:

---

Many sites have rules and policies that are designed to
control their use by students.
Inclusion of a site on this list does not imply that the site
condones "contract cheating".

---

Consequently, it is clear that there is nothing negative in itself about being on this list. It really is just a list of websites for instructors to check in order to detect contract cheating, and presumably cheating in general. The only good that we will do by informing Clarke of his mistake is that it will make this list more accurate for academic purposes... but if a user of this list really wants accuracy, he/she should be doing his/her own investigation of the facts anyway.

I followed the link and find the "disclaimer" is worthless, the link title is:
"List of sites associated with Contract Cheating (updated 7 May 09)(Lancaster & Clarke)"
The document location and filename is:
"Contract Cheating/CheatSitesURLs_7May2009.pdf"
And the document title is:
"Sites associated with Contract Cheating"

The implication is that every site on the list is associated with Contract Cheating:
"Inclusion of a site on this list does not imply that the site condones "contract cheating" ."
There is a distinct difference between being associated with, and condoning something.

Realistically, the title should be "Association of Contract Cheating: Anything that has anything to do with programming"

I emailed Robert Clarke and Thomas Lancaster about this.

My email to them:

Quote:

---

Dear Robert Clarke and Thomas Lancaster

I note with interest that a site that I frequent is listed in your
document at
http://bsstudents.bcu.ac.uk/sdrive/B...heating/CheatS
itesURLs_7May2009.pdf
as being "associated with contract cheating".

The site I refer to is cboard.cprogramming.com.

I am interested to know what evidence you have to back up these
allegations of "association" other than the fact that cprogramming.com
is a programming and discussion site. As a user of the site who has
helped in the guidance of posters you are accusing me and every other
member of the site of contract cheating by association. This is a
libellous slur against my character and something that I do not take
lightly. Any post that looks like homework is responded to as such
using the board homework policy. All posters to the boards are directed
to post their existing code with any help given being based from that.
There is no financial incentive in providing help to other programmers
on the site.

Your list is libellous to the sites listed and users of those sites that
do not engage in so called "Contract Cheating". I seriously recommend
that you rework your document to include ONLY resources that actively
engage in so called "Contract Cheating" activities and not what amounts
to any site associated with programming.

I shall give you opportunity to reply to this communication before
deciding whether to take this matter further.

Yours sincerely
[My name here]

---

I received a long, and what appears to be mostly copy and paste, reply:

Quote:

---

I am sorry to hear of your concerns in this matter.

The document to which your refer is meant to be read in the context of
other publications which detail the way in which students have been
found to use forums and discussion site in order to get their work done
for them.

We have noted that most of these sites act in an ethical and
professional manner by publishing and policing a "no-homework" policy
and have shown examples of where moderators and contributors have
berated students who have tried to breach these rules.

Unfortunately we have also recorded examples of where an assignment is
first posted on a forum by a student and is later identified on an
auction site - posted there by a "contractor" who specialises in doing
assignments for students.

Likewise, students who are refused help through a (free) forum site have
been seen to post the work themselves onto a different (fee-bearing)
site.

Students have also been known to attempt to get their work done in a
piece-meal fashion (we call this "stone soup" programming after a folk
tale of the same name). Posting onto multiple forums can be attempts to
avoid detection.

In the past few years of researching this subject we have identified
over 6,000 cases in which students have attempted to cheat, and traced
around 2,000 back to the source institution.

Frequently the details of assignments found on auction sites is also
matched by entries on forum sites.
The information on the forum site can provide valuable evidence that
enables us to attribute the work on the auction site, which enables us
to warn the lecturer involved.

You will appreciate that students attempting to buy solutions in this
way tend to try to hide their tracks.
Trying to control this problem requires using every available source of
information.

As academics, we are concerned about the threat to the value of
qualifications posed by all forms of cheating, particularly those that
are not detectable by the use of standard "non-originality" software.

Students are becoming increasing adapt at using the Internet to help
them in these dishonest activities.
Some postings on legitimate sites appear to be genuine requests for help
to solve personal and commercial problems, but in reality are attempts
by students to cheat.
This must pose a problem to owners and moderators of legitimate web
sites.

Our published research aimed to show the range of categories of sites
that are used in this way.
The text that accompanies the list of categories explains the way in
which forum sites can become unwittingly involved.

I apologise if the published list appeared to you to traduce the
reputation of cboard.cprogramming.com.
That was never our intention.

Robert Clarke

---

If you bothered to get all the way through the reply you will see that although they are sorry for my concerns, they have failed to address any of the points - specifically how they deemed this site to be associated with Contract Cheating other than the fact it is a forum. I noticed on their list that answers.google.com is associated with Contract Cheating as well, but not Yahoo Answers?

Anyway, that is the situation as it stands.

Yay BuzzBuzz! If there is a law suit please include me, I could use a new boat ;)

I've replied to the non-reply. I'll save posting it here for if/when I get a reply.

Ouch! I would prefer if you left speaking for all of us in the hands of webmaster or kermi.

Why do the universities care so much? The cheaters are only harming themselves. They can't graduate properly without learning these things anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

Ouch! I would prefer if you left speaking for all of us in the hands of webmaster or kermi.

---

Why would you think the webmaster would want this responsibility in this case? I applaud the initiative here. Buzzbuzz used the first person singular for the most part, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

Ouch! I would prefer if you left speaking for all of us in the hands of webmaster or kermi.

---

I'm not speaking for any of you, or this site. I'm speaking for ME. I am representing my interests and have nowhere implied that I speak for or on behalf of cprogramming.com. My references to cprogramming.com are the implied association between its users and Contract Cheating, as one of its users that association is extended to my person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

I'm not speaking for any of you, or this site.

---

Does that mean you aren't going to help me get a boat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

Does that mean you aren't going to help me get a boat?

---

Ofcourse I'll help you get a boat. Let me know what you want and I'll email one over to you right away ;)

But seriously the issue with Birmingham Universities list is that legislation is created on the back of "research" like that. It doesn't take a major leap of the imagination to see this "research" being used as "evidence" in some sort of legislation to limit access to certain things on the internet.

If you don't speak out then you can't complain when bad things happen.

Do nothing, or do something - it's an individual choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

But seriously the issue with Birmingham Universities list is that legislation is created on the back of "research" like that. It doesn't take a major leap of the imagination to see this "research" being used as "evidence" in some sort of legislation to limit access to certain things on the internet.

If you don't speak out then you can't complain when bad things happen.

Do nothing, or do something - it's an individual choice.

---

Couldn't agree more. I wouldn't be too worried about it tho, as I still believe most academics, whatever their field, would sooner sell their souls to the devil.

But it wouldn't be too far to go for them to find a means of using this to scare kids away by defining any demonstrated association as guilt -- eg "there will be no use of forums period, and you will be punished if caught". Which is why a pro-active stance is a good one, because that helps to provide other (potentially opposed) professors with something coherent to clue into "before it is too late". Like, I won't stand for this hogwash.

I didn't do my degree in CS, but I guarantee if this issue involved English or Comparative Literature, I could quickly find some heads of institutes who would remember me, take me seriously, and quite probably weigh in publicly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

Why would you think the webmaster would want this responsibility in this case?

---

I assume that any libel case brought to court will involve the webmaster whether he wants that or not. He owns it, and is liable.

If the email BuzzBuzz wrote is the full text, then he has made no attempt to separate himself from someone who really could, actually sue for libel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Internet tough guy

I shall give you opportunity to reply to this communication before
deciding whether to take this matter further.

---

I am simply unsure whether taking the matter further is really a threat that BuzzBuzz is fit to make for anyone else. I just don't want anyone to go to jail over it. We might not have a board anymore, if that happens. Crazier things have happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

I assume that any libel case brought to court will involve the webmaster whether he wants that or not. He owns it, and is liable.

---

Only if BuzzBuzz intends to sue cboard. My chance of getting a boat out of that one may not be so great.

Hey I just want to repeat myself in case anyone is paying attention:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

I didn't do my degree in CS, but I guarantee if this issue involved English or Comparative Literature, I could quickly find some heads of institutes who would remember me, take me seriously, and quite probably weigh in publicly.

---

Just a suggestion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxorator

Why do the universities care so much? The cheaters are only harming themselves. They can't graduate properly without learning these things anyway.

---

Becaus eit causes unfair competition for entry level spots with people who are qualified to perform teh work, and when they fail at teh job it makes the university look bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

I assume that any libel case brought to court will involve the webmaster whether he wants that or not. He owns it, and is liable.

---

No, UK laws are specific. The webmaster would only be liable in such a case as he/they allowed libellous statements to be made and took no action in the event that someone notified them of the libellous statements. The libellous statement has been made against this site, and others, and their users by the association.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiteflags

If the email BuzzBuzz wrote is the full text, then he has made no attempt to separate himself from someone who really could, actually sue for libel.

---

That's because by implied association of this site with Contract Cheating I am being libelled, as is every other user of this site and all the other sites mentioned in their list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whiteflags

Quote:

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by Internet tough guy
I shall give you opportunity to reply to this communication before
deciding whether to take this matter further.

---

I am simply unsure whether taking the matter further is really a threat that BuzzBuzz is fit to make for anyone else. I just don't want anyone to go to jail over it. We might not have a board anymore, if that happens. Crazier things have happened.

---

Before you start throwing around playground insults you better make sure that you actually understand what is going on. If you don't, as the case appears, understand how libel works, or how UK laws work then I suggest you ask for clarification instead of wading chin deep into your own cesspit.

For your information, suing people left right and centre is an American thing. In the UK, litigation is a last resort. I have pointed out to the author that I feel libelled by their inference of complicity in Contract Cheating of this site. There are many other avenues open to "taking things further" than litigation.

Also - no one goes to jail for libel as it is a civil tort. I'm not making any threats (in fact, I'm not making any threats at all!) or decisions for anyone else other than myself. I've also made it abundantly clear that I am speaking for myself, not for the site or its admins:

"a site that I frequent"
"The site I refer to"
"As a user of the site"
"you are accusing me"
"against my character"
"Your list is libellous to the sites listed and users of those sites"

And what I posted is the full text, barring my name and contact details. However, this issue is not only about this site, it is about EVERY legitimate site listed on there.

But let's take a step back and look at what I'm getting at (and we're all supposed to use logic, so let's apply some):

The list is named "CheatSiteURLs" - that implies that ALL sites named in that list are for cheating. Agree/Disagree?

The header title is "Sites associated with Contract Cheating" - that implies that ALL sites named are associated, or complicit by definition, with Contract Cheating. Agree/Disagree?

The implication is that users of each of the sites are Contract Cheaters by association - the forums do not populate themselves and as I have "helped" users in my own unique way the inference is there that I am complicit in Contract Cheating along with each and every one of you. This isn't "Internet Tough Guy" talk as Surrender Flags :) would say, this is cold logic.

Now, I hope that the stick has now been firmly grasped by the correct end and there is no more confusion and that I do not have a one man mission to destroy this site using heat rays from Alpha Centauri or anywhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxorator

Why do the universities care so much? The cheaters are only harming themselves. They can't graduate properly without learning these things anyway.

---

Why do educators care about their students and not want them to harm themselves?

I would recommend we allow the webmaster or kermi to be the voice on this issue. Just as you would not attempt to make a public statement about a company or product you did not fully own without the proper permission you should not make statements about how the admin of the board stands on certain topics unless you know for sure the stance and/or have the admin's permission.
I would not recommend any users attempt to be 'the voice' of this board unless they have been designated to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bubba

I would not recommend any users attempt to be 'the voice' of this board unless they have been designated to do so.

---

I'm not sure if that was aimed at me, or just a general reminder of representation.

In case there is still confusion over what I am doing or said: I am not representing this site, or attempting to be its voice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

I'm not speaking for any of you, or this site. I'm speaking for ME. I am representing my interests and have nowhere implied that I speak for or on behalf of cprogramming.com. My references to cprogramming.com are the implied association between its users and Contract Cheating, as one of its users that association is extended to my person.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

I'm not making any threats (in fact, I'm not making any threats at all!) or decisions for anyone else other than myself. I've also made it abundantly clear that I am speaking for myself, not for the site or its admins:

"a site that I frequent"
"The site I refer to"
"As a user of the site"
"you are accusing me"
"against my character"
"Your list is libellous to the sites listed and users of those sites"

---

I posted my communications with the authors of the list as it is pertinent to this discussion first and the site second.

Obviously this issue makes some people uncomfortable, so I won't post any more of my communications with the authors of the list. That does not change the fact that I as a user of this site (and others listed) object to the implication of being associated with contract cheating. As such I will be continuing as I have done in defending MY rights, but I won't be posting updates. If anyone is interested in the issue and wants to contact me about it, they can do so at [email protected] (I hope posting an email address is ok, if it's not then please moderate it out).

Cheers all

Personally I don't give that lame site any more credit than they deserve, its some backwater anti-cheating site, its opinion matters about as much to me as my hamburgers opinion on what brand of toilet paper I should use.

In both cases I take their opinion and wipe my ass with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abachler

Personally I don't give that lame site any more credit than they deserve, its some backwater anti-cheating site, its opinion matters about as much to me as my hamburgers opinion on what brand of toilet paper I should use.

In both cases I take their opinion and wipe my ass with it.

---

It's Birmingham City University and the authors are apparently leaders in their field of anti-plagiarism and contract cheating detection. As such, their research and methods should be beyond reproach otherwise they bring themselves and their institution into disrepute.

You can do what you like with opinions, but when opinion is dressed as fact something needs to be said. There are a lot of people out there who blindly accept "facts" without question - especially when they come from an apparently reputable source.

I wonder if this is how they did the research for the list

Also, the list has been offline since late last night, it appears to be corrupted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

It's Birmingham City University

---

Never heard of it, i.e. backwater. Oh I'm sure its king ........ in its little corner of the cesspool, but the rest of the world couldnt care less.

Quote:

---

and the authors are apparently leaders in their field of anti-plagiarism and contract cheating detection. As such, their research and methods should be beyond reproach otherwise they bring themselves and their institution into disrepute.

---

Everyone always thinks they are leaders in their field. They are just posers .

Quote:

---

You can do what you like with opinions

---

Like ignore them? They are trolls with their own web site. They are trying to convince acadimia that they serve some vital purpose, probably in hopes of getting grant money.

If it bothers you then .......... to them, but please do it somewhere else, as this whole thread is going nowhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abachler

Never heard of it, i.e. backwater. Oh I'm sure its king ........ in its little corner of the cesspool, but the rest of the world couldnt care less.

---

I'm not sure which university you went to, but I guess it wasn't Harvard, Standford or MIT - which is about the ones I've heard of in the US (actually, I know Texas University too). So if you have only heard of Oxford and Cambridge, we're about the same level. I can probably name another dozen or so universities in the UK, but I could certainly not give you a list of ALL of them. I have been to the Birmingham City University a couple of times (knew one of the tutors, who last time I heard was working for Intel's Compiler team, he was working on embedded systems, to be precise, and I did a tutorial on x86 processors that they took on). It is not the top univiersity in the UK, but it has good reputation in the it's area of influence.

But I guess that since you live in the US, you don't care about things that happen in the UK...

--
Mats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abachler

Never heard of it, i.e. backwater. Oh I'm sure its king ........ in its little corner of the cesspool, but the rest of the world couldnt care less.

Everyone always thinks they are leaders in their field. They are just posers .



Like ignore them? They are trolls with their own web site. They are trying to convince acadimia that they serve some vital purpose, probably in hopes of getting grant money.

---

You know, for someone who claims to be so bright, either you're not very bright.....or just trolling.

I have the ability to highlight the key matters in this issue and use them as discussion points. I do not control peoples level of understanding of the issue and I'm certainly not your geography teacher. Please read the background information and all the posts before declaring something as worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abachler

If it bothers you then .......... to them, but please do it somewhere else, as this whole thread is going nowhere.

---

As I've already stated I am doing it somewhere else and won't be posting regarding those actions here. If you feel this thread is going nowhere (and that is your opinion upon which I am right now taking your advice) then exercise your skills in free-will and don't engage it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz

It's Birmingham City University and the authors are apparently leaders in their field of anti-plagiarism and contract cheating detection. As such, their research and methods should be beyond reproach otherwise they bring themselves and their institution into disrepute.

---

Okay, these are computer science professors who are "leaders in their field of anti-plagiarism and contract cheating detection". Hah! Now I am beginning to understand just what a dungpile this is. Didn't I say to start with:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

You might as well throw your mind in the garbage as take this tish seriously. And I bet most professors would agree with what I am saying. But there are crackpots in academia -- perhaps these busybodies are some of them? Surely their (paid) time would be better spent in more serious pursuits (unless they are the kind of academics not taken seriously by their peers, and so are left with nothing better to do).

---

Which is not to malign the U of B, I am quite positive every university (no matter how great) must maintain it's quota of crackpots, eg, Harvard economists who believe a return to the gold standard will be good.

Unfortunately, it does imply that they may now be at a point where, having failed to make much of a dent internationally doing something real, they are now resigned to making a name for themselves this way. I guess we will see.

Even more of a reason for someone to bring this to the attention of some more reasonable academic, of which I am sure there are many who would be willing to provide some temperance before this rolling heap of scrap snowballs.

I remember in a Programming 1 course our teacher told us about how someone from a programming forum contacted him that a student of his tried to comission him to do a homework assignment for him. The student was failed from the course.

Honestly, programming 1-2 these days are not that much work that you'd need to pay someone to do the homework for you.

You have to pick your battles. For me this one is not worth fighting.

Quote:

---

" Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz"
I'm not making any threats (in fact, I'm not making any threats at all!) or decisions for anyone else other than myself. I've also made it abundantly clear that I am speaking for myself, not for the site or its admins:

"you are accusing me"

---

Why, they've besmirched the good name of BuzzBuzz forever! :-)

I think some of you are taking this a little too hard. And if UK law is similar to US, I'm not sure you have a case, even if BuzzBuzz is your legal name.

http://www.medialaw.org/Content/Navi...%20is%20Libel?

"The statement(s) alleged to be defamatory must also have been published to at least one other person (other than the subject of the statement) and must be "of and concerning" the plaintiff. That is, those hearing or reading the statement must identify it specifically with the plaintiff."

The authors of that list are being very disingenuous in lumping discussion forums such as this where advice is free, open and tempered (that is we don't give out the whole answer right off the bat, and try and guide the student to understanding the problem), in with outright "cheat" sites such as rentacoder where you can get any answer you like, personalised just for you, so long as you pony up enough cash.

To that extent (an open discussion towards understanding), a forum such as this is no more a "cheat" site than say attending a lecture or a tutorial session on campus. The only difference being that the student might actually learn the truth. Perhaps one of the things they "worry" about is having their utter lack of knowledge about say C or C++ exposed. And yes, there are plenty of "professors" who couldn't tell you what an ANSI standard was even if you threw it at them.

Then there is another group of "professors" who apply minimal effort to teaching what little they know, set the SAME exercises year after year (possibly from a book), perform no other assessment of a students ability (say a closed room exercise), and then harp on about how everyone else is the problem. If you create a tree with low hanging fruit, don't blame everyone else for picking it - do something about it yourself.

If they really want to find out the lay of the land, they should do their own "blind" tests by posting some assignments on a few forums, and see how far they get before getting an earful of "DYOHW". Publishing a list based on google searches is a bunch of crap.