|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
In Reply to: Re: AFLAC PROBLEMS posted by Plagiarism? AFLAC INFO SOURCE DOCUMENT on May 12, 2004 at 18:23:10:
: Your answer sounded a little "too" qualified for someone who scored only 73% on their insurance exam, and scored less than 70 in six sections of the exam, so I thought I would try and find out where you got this information, and then bust you AGAIN for not attributing to your sources.
: Ken, a serious researcher or writer ALWAYS cites his sources. So, here is the webpage from which you borrowed, (read ripped-off) the information contained in your post:
: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_05/b3868080_mz017.htm
: You wrote:
: "Between 1992 and 2003, the expected operating income swelled to $968-million ranking the company number #41 out of the top 50 in performance. Then came the fiasco."
: Business Week wrote:
: "Indeed, since 1992, operating income has more than tripled to an expected $968 million in 2003 -- a performance that earned it the No. 41 slot on the BusinessWeek 50 ranking of top-performing companies."
: Granted, it's paraphrased at least, but good, conscientious writers provide sources for paraphrases. Paraphrasing without citing is plagiarism, and plagiarism is akin to stealing. See http://www.haverford.edu/writingprogram/writingcenter/MMplag.html for advice on plagiarism.
: You wrote:
: "Well it turns out that AFLAC held $428-million in bonds with Parlamat which equated to about 25% of all of Parlamat's bonds held by US Insurance Company Invetors. The bottom line is, AFLAC took a $257-million loss which severely dipped into AFLAC's gains of an estimated $968-million."
: Business Week wrote:
: "But suddenly, things aren't all ducky at AFLAC. In mid-December, the conservatively run company stunned Wall Street with the news that it held $428 million in bonds from the scandal-ridden Italian dairy giant, Parmalat. That was nearly a quarter of the Parmalat bonds held by all U.S. insurers. The upshot: AFLAC took a $257 million loss that will slash fourth-quarter earnings."
: Your paraphrase in that case still needs to be cited, since you're using data that you did not gather yourself.
: It was a good effort, Ken, but I don't know why you would go to the trouble of paraphrasing the article when providing the link would have been sufficient. Besides, the original Dean Foust article that you ripped-off is far more accurately and thoroughly written. For those who want to read a real writer, here's the link again.
: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_05/b3868080_mz017.htm
: By the way, to the best of my knowledge, Dean Foust has never been in the insurance industry. Shouldn't you be busting his chops for stepping on your expert toes? I find it interesting that you, a self-proclaimed expert in all things insurance, have to rip-off material written by someone who has never been in the industry. But that's nothing new for you, is it? You've been ripping-off your betters for some time now.
------------------------------------
For someone who has been successful in the Insurance and Financial Services who tried a few times and failed at it, your brief encounter within the industry itself does not justify you for one with proof that has been documented you plagerisized those of us in the know to put together a package of information we gave to the public free and you attempted to sell it over the Internet.
So if the information I posted was plagerized why don't you post the source of the information I allegedly plagerized instead of speculating that the information was definately plagerized.
By the way, I have never seen any documentation on the Internet to support any alleged credentials you have as you have been privey to my credentials aired on the Internet.
As a finishing note I would highly suggest you view the message I posted this evening surrounding family pictures and social security numbers among other certain information that puts a bitter taste in your mouth to which you have posted your objections too.