hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: Plagiarism Story...Part I (and going back almost two years?)

Hey Y'all...Just curious if'n any of you remember this post of May 16th, 1997?...and will y'all say now "SEE?...I told you so!" <g>
paste below
>Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 21:11:56 -0500
>To: AHS server
>From: Nash Family <raffi@in.on.ca>
>Subject: Journal 28.1 arrives in Canada
>Subject: AHS Journal Volume 28 Number 1
>Dear Robins/Robinettes:
>Journal 28.1 -- finally arrived in Guelph Ontario Canada "YIPPEE KI AYE"!
>My complements to those involved in putting it together "NICE"! 
>There is one particular article, which I feel, deserves some serious questioning; that is, on page 37, titled 'Cultivar and Cultivar-Group Definitions Applied to Hosta' written by Ben Zonneveld...
>Looks to me?.. Like the above mentioned article!.. Is just a re-write?.. Taken from Volume 27 Number 1... To whit?.. An article titled 'Using an Artist's Palette to Classify Hosta Sports' written by Jim Hawes, and starting on page 87.  The Grouping of sports, was presented quite nicely by Mr. Hawes; and now, Zonneveld presents these ideas again, under his own 'Group Titles'; and that is, same grouping, said in a different way, as if he thought it up himself; and this, under new Title and Authorship.  I think?.. When one uses material already written by someone else; and does not give credit, or ask permission of the person who wrote the ideas originally; and publishes same, under a new Title and Authorship, then perhaps the best way to describe this, is to pull out the Dictionairy -- QUOTE...
>plagiarize (plâ´je-rìz´) verb
>plagiarized, plagiarizing, plagiarizes verb, transitive
>1.	To use and pass off as one's own (the ideas or writings of another).
>2.	To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another).
>verb, intransitive
>To put forth as original to oneself the ideas or words of another.
>- pla´giariz´er noun
>The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation. All rights reserved.
>I remain, hosta sincerely yours
>Bill Nash, Zone 4,
>Guelph, Ontario, CANADA
>------- in response to -----
At 12:16 PM 2/8/99 -0500, Jim Hawes wrote:
>Whenever someone violates the code of ethics, breaks the rules or does
>something wrong to benefit from it, we often give him the benefit of the
>doubt, saying maybe he doesn't understand the rules...maybe he made a
>minor mistake or didn't realize it. Then it happens again. Then again.
>We tell him  to stop. He denies he did anything wrong and continues as
>before. Well, that is what has happened and continues to happen.
>Read the story I will tell you. Try to understand why I am telling it.
>It is about Ben. It answers the questions...What did Ben do? When did he
>do it? What proof exists? And does it rise to the level of
>But first some background information. I joined the AHS sponsored Robin
>called honza  in January 1997 at the suggestion of Ran Lydell....to
>communicate with friends, to exchange information about hostas and to do
>it more rapidly. I joined because it was a challenge for me to keep up
>with the younger generation of hosta enthusiasts (I'm 78 year old).  At
>that time it had been active for less than a year, I believe. I was a
>complete novice with computers but caught on to simple the operations of
>e-mail communications with hosta friends. Around February 1997 I
>initiated private correspondence with Ben Zonneveld. I assumed that
>since he was active on the Robin, was connected with Leiden University
>and was interested in scientific subject matter, that we had much in
>common. I was very wrong. Our correspondence soon developed into a
>public debate in which Ben was to be the "winner".I found that he wanted
>to control every discussion, was an authority in all subjects...not just
>Genetics, was very aggressive in wanting to dominate  and actually
>distorted scientific facts beyond  belief. I decided I did not want to
>participate in these kinds of discussions in which his ego was so
>all-important. I stopped communicating with him when he deliberately
>"put me down", so to speak in a public, not private  post of April 21,
>1997 entitled "Re:P700 and 680" in which he said:
>   "Thanks for your interesting information. I must disappoint you to
>a     certain extent P700 mean protein 700"....(Typos are not mine)
>In this post he tried to tell me that P700 was a protein when, as a
>plant physiologist, I knew full well it was a chloropyll a molecule, 
>that he was giving me incorrect information in my own area of
>specialization. I wrote soon afterward the Article "Those Blasted
>Plastids" to set the record straight on what P700 really was, and
>expanded upon the theme of the  structure and role of plastids in
>photosynthesis and pigmentation in hostas. This is all somewhat
>technical and those without a plant science backgound may not fully
>understand this subject or how this kind of  communication violated
>accepted ways of communication between one scientist and another. I
>broke off communication because I realized that Ben was a fake outside
>of his field of expertize. We never discussed subjects in his
>Ben's habit of writing e-mail posts was often very odd in my opinion, 
>with much information that was incorrect. I did not want to argue with
>him so I did not dispute him in any fashion. I thought it strange that
>he was perpetually asking people on the Robin for information and
>suggesting that they send him plants and pollen for his scientific
>research. I found this to be excessively demanding.I learned that Ben
>had a "following " of people on the Robin to whom he addressed "Dear
>Hosta Fans", which was different, to say the least. He was considered by
>several as "an emminent authority". Ben had other types of supporters as
>well..those who recognized him as "a true scientist,  someone who , when
>he gets us hooked. will guide us in things about science." These views
>were those of Bob Olson , President of AHS at the time, in an e-mail
>post to Frank Niykos on the occasion of Ben's instructions to about 100
>people regarding counting pods in their gardens...the purpose of which
>was to gather scientific data on pod count on different hosta cultivars,
>to correlate such data with other research he was doing with pollen
>fertility and seed germination viability. The data presumably was sent
>to Ben who was to compile it, draw conclusions and report to the hosta
>community about his findings. I don't think this was ever reported...at
>least I have never seen it reported in any fashion. I gathered the
>impression that the reason for getting people to gather data for him was
>more to draw their attention to him, rather than to conduct valid
>experimentation. I admit that I may be mistaken in making these
>assumptions. If so, many of my friends who have drawn the same
>conclusion are also wrong. 
>These and other events tended to create a sort of polarization between
>those who supported and aided Ben and those who recognized him as a
>fraud when it came to hosta knowledge and technology. There is no need
>to identify these people. The polarization exists to this day and is
>becoming more obvious and more serious. The rank and file membership may
>not even be aware of this serious dichotomy. My amazement is that the
>AHS leaders are not aware of the serious nature of this dichotomy. I
>wonder why  they support, aid and abett a fraud, a plagiarist, a liar. I
>ask, why the AHS publishes articles authored by Ben when the substance
>and data within the article is copied from Journal articles previously
>published by others? Why does the AHS praise Ben (see Journal Vol 29.2,
>pg 90) for his research in gathering data on sports when the research
>consisted in copying data of names, descriptions and sources of sports
>presented by others in previous publications...all without citation or
>acknowledgment of source of the information. Why do they allow him to
>advertise his Book of Sports on the AHS Robin or sell his Book at the
>National Convention when it contains obvious examples of plagiary?
>There you have some background and the essence of my charges...that Ben
>plagiarized data and concepts previously published and did so without
>citation of sources of his information. By all standards this is
>plagiary. He has denied that he did so. In further parts of my story I
>will give specific examples of what was stolen and used in an
>unacknowledged way to make it appeared as his own work. I will prove
>what I claim to be the facts of the case with documented evidence... not
>merely my statements. The evidence will be Ben's own words in e-mail
>posts from Holland which you may be able to verify by withdrawing them
>from your computer's trashbin  as I have done. In fairness,  Ben is
>offered the opportunity of rebuttal of my facts if he wishes.
>Part two will begin with a definition or two  so that readers will
>understand what plagiarism is and what it is not. 
>Jim Hawes
>To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

the 'SHADOW' gardener
funkia luv dove
Willaim NASH
157 Harvard Road
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index