There's nothing infuriating about it. Students are usually prohibited from posting homeworks and/or solutions online because courses reuse material from previous years. Students can consider themselves lucky if the only fallout from this is the DMCA takedown because at Princeton this would be considered a violation of the honor code, which has very serious implications.
You're missing the point... madaxe_again was disciplined for plagiarizing themself, because someone decided to ignore the reality of the software having caught madaxe_again's own website.
I look forward to hearing what revenge madaxe_again exacted on the culprit.
The closest thing to this that happened to me not being allowed to take a graduate-level class based on a piece of software that I helped develop, because I was an undergrad. That was dealt with by disabling said software for the instructor until the stupidity ended.
You are missing the point. Student not allowed to make their homeworks public and this is for a very good reason. It helps other students looking to plagiarize, and students have a responsibility to make a reasonable effort to prevent this. And while I can't comment on what these particular students were told, I can guarantee you that all the instructors I know make it a point to tell their students that they are not allowed to put their homeworks up online.
Another issue to consider is that the homeoworks are not student property, they largely belong to the instructor. A lot of effort goes into producing interesting and educational homeworks, and it's all lost if students can just google the answers. If you disagree with the idea that homeworks are instructor property, ask yourself if it would be okay if an instructor at Princeton just reused (without permission) the homeworks from a course at Harvard.
madaxe_again said that the University gave him a zero for plagiarizing a website when he was the one that controlled that website. Whether or not it is legitimate to post solutions online, this is not what madaxe claims to have been penalized for.
In my opinion, arbitrarily shoehorning a perceived infraction into a preexisting rule that it doesn't fit so that you can punish behavior that you hadn't thought to disallow before the fact is an abuse of university policies.
If madaxe is recounting the event accurately, then I think that the university is more in the wrong. University policies are hard enough to follow in situations like this when the university sticks to the letter of the policy. Plus, universities can always go back to update policies as they see new behaviors that they would like to disallow. But if the university uses whatever policies that they do have on the books to punish arbitrary behaviors that they don't disallow, then it puts the student in the situation of having to predict how this practice will impact them in the future. This is essentially impossible, and quite defeats the entire purpose of having policies written down in the first place. If this practice is common, then the policies are merely legitimacy theater, and are in fact illegitimate.
The situation is further confounded by the power dynamics at play. Tanking a students GPA is a pretty tremendous bludgeon, and outside of retaining a lawyer, a bludgeon against which students have little defense. This power discrepancy demands discretion on the part of the university. There is a level of injustice in the act of a university wielding this power against a student without a grounding in legitimate policy.
Plagiarism laws aren't just about whether you copied from someone else. A lot of times, certainly in all the universities I've been part of, they will penalize you if you did not take reasonable precautions to ensure that others did not copy from you. There's nothing unreasonable about this.
As far as the rest of your comment goes, maybe there are some cases when students are unfairly penalized for hard-to-follow policies. But the instance here seems pretty clear cut. I also think shady behavior from students more often than not goes unpunished, so your fears of a power-drunk university arbitrary destroying students' GPA just for the heck of it, seem unjustified.
> madaxe_again said that the University gave him a zero for plagiarizing a website when he was the one that controlled that website.
Many university "plagiarism" policies prohibit all of (And this has been true since before the web was a thing):
(1) plagiarizing others by copying their work,
(2) "plagiarizing" yourself by turning in work of your own that is not original work exclusively for the course it is prepared for without explicit advance permission to reuse previous work (or use one piece of work for two simultaneous classes), or
(3) facilitating plagiarism by other by way of publishing work done for class assignments without explicit advance permission.
> Tanking a students GPA is a pretty tremendous bludgeon, and outside of retaining a lawyer, a bludgeon against which students have little defense.
Most universities have procedures to resolve student complaints about irregularities in grading, application of policies, etc., short of requiring a lawsuit against the university, which do not generally require legal counsel to make use of.
It wasn't prohibited - this was 2002, and they were only just getting up to speed with this internet thing. It wasn't exactly work that could have easily been plagiarised - 20,000 word research paper on Minkowski, Kaluza-Klein, etc.
I had no revenge, I just ended up with a worse than hoped for degree, a deeper distrust of authority, and utter contempt for university "education", which would be better described as "conformation".
Do you really think that what you did was acceptable? It's equivalent to putting up your essay on a public notice board. Do you think the latter would've been acceptable behavior?
Maybe the punishment was a little harsh, but I think it'd be hard to argue you weren't in the wrong.
> a deeper distrust of authority, and utter contempt for university "education", which would be better described as "conformation"
Based on what you've said so far, to me you sound immature and are rationalizing your immaturity by blaming "the system."
I think it was perfectly acceptable, yes. I wrote a paper on a topic of my choice, I handed it in, and I then posted it to my site, as a blog post.
There was nothing that prohibited this, and I had posted data (astronomical observations & images) and assignments to my site for years previous to this incident.
Frankly, I would suggest that your thinking is extremely immature, if your first course of action is to call someone else immature, and to respect all authority unquestioningly - shows a lack of development of thought, and an absence of critical thinking.
A lot of universities have policies surrounding using work you've done for other classes in subsequent classes too. For instance, if you write a paper for one class and use it in whole, or in part in a different class.
I think posting finished homework online is a silly thing to do regardless. There's no reason to do that. I'd wager students get informed of these policies well before it gets anywhere close to where this went.
Students are not allowed to post the work that they do to the Internet. madaxe_again did post the work they did to the Internet. They were incorrectly punished for plagiarism - it was their own work - but they could have been punished for posting homework to the Internet.
So yell at madaxe_again for publishing proprietary stuff, not plagiarism.
The internal justice system made two errors, not zero. That's never okay, especially if it claims to be errorless ( shawn-furyan put it better than I did)
Would you be okay with getting a fine in the mail for having done something that is logically impossible to do (such as plagiarizing from yourself), regardless if you had to pay a different fine for a different issue or not?
EDIT: I can't answer to the post below, for some reason, thanks for the correction on self plagiarism!
It wasn't against any regulation in 2002 - but I suppose you think I deserved this because... What, I should have known that in the future it'd be against the rules? Cool logic man. Report yourself for punishment, being called Dan might be against the rules one day.
In 2002 at Durham (UK), it wasn't prohibited at all. They'd only just started using anti-plagiarism software. It also wasn't really a very plagarisable piece of work - big research paper on supersymmetry.
Finally, the publication date on my website was several days after I handed it in - so I assume you, like they, believe I have a secret time machine?
