first

First!!! :)

We can do better. 200 comments in three hours....

Go.

second

Dandeegili darnetdeeno you beat me!

Owned

I no longer want to say anything. And I should probably be working.

So whats new you guys?

Just tossing my two cents in:

As a writer and cartoonist, I think the plagiarist (whatever her name may be) should be flogged. She is receiving no less than she deserves, and anyone who calls you "mean" or tries to defend the horrible cheater is a tool.

Also, just to keep the ball rolling, anyone who believes in Karma is a shithead who should be forced to eat drano until they die.

There is definitely a contract. Nate could claim that the contract doesn't exist, or that Laura's copy of the contract is a fraud, but that's a dangerous tack to take, especially when he broadcast it to the world.

It is up to Laura to prove that his paper was insufficient; using his own description of it as such may be sufficient.

However, the fact that Laura accepted the paper and even turned it in helps Nate's position as to suitability considerably.

there is no contract you idiots!!!!

eat some draino!!!

A verbal contract is just as valid as a written contract in court. That is, if they both agree to what the contract was. A judge will make no distinctions.

Its true - you can't make a legally enforceable contract to do an illegal act. That's why bookies break people's knees instead of taking them to court.

Holy shit- college girls, late night weekend AIM sessions, anti-plagiarism campaigns- this can only spell a major blow to the Alpha Betas!

After reading this saga and a few comments here and there, I was certainly shocked at the overwhelming hatred of plagiarism. I mean good God, I understand that ALL of you worked real hard towards your English degrees, but this shit is just militant. I knew that you guys existed in college, but I thought for sure your fanatic views would change after graduating (excepting your views on professional plagiarism). Apparently not. Anyways, I think we have all learned a great lesson from this - as adults we are not to abuse the dumb (presumably stoned) college kids! That is our dharma.

I feel for your astoundingly academic backgrounds. But maybe you jerk off twice a day, or you drink, smoke, gamble, or whatever you do that the sons of priests would want to shoot you in the foot for. Point is, lets not be huge nerds!

Also, multiple segments of my post are paraphrased from sources I refuse to cite.

Isn't there a saying about "a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on"?

Then again, I don't know many legal precedents are based on cute sayings.

There may have been a contract, but it did not stipulate the quality of the paper.

Laura accepted the paper without question, and failed to make good on her part, paying Nate.

So would the contract be voided, or would it absolve Nate of any wrongdoing anyway?

How can you say a verbal contract is valid in court? You can't prove what another person said. It has to be in writing and signed.

I know for a FACT that a verbal contract is just as valid as a written one. The only problem is both parties agreeing to what the contract was.

To Nate,

I'm sure you are an intelligent guy, and your fake paper was funny. But I have to say, in this case you were a huge asshole. I guess this is the minority opinion so I thought I'd post it here. Have you ever driven faster than the speed limit? Bought beer before you turned 21? Parked your car with the bumper hanging just a tiny bit over someone's driveway?

You ruined this chick's life. That's a shitty thing to do. Plagiarism is bad. You don't plagiarize. Congratulations. I think ruining other people's lives is bad too.

Selling that girl the fake paper was both funny and mean. Probably funny enough to make up for the meanness, particularly since it was the result of your principled stance on cheating. But publishing her name and college was a dick move. I hope you can take a break from trying to justify your actions and put yourself in her position for a few minutes. And I hope that if she does get expelled, that she goes a little crazy and recruits hundreds of people from the internet to track you down and find all your personal information. I hope they then call you at home a lot and tell you that you're an asshole. And I hope they follow you around day and night for a few months notifying the authorities every time you break even the most trivial rule or regulation. I hope plagiarism is stamped out all across this great land, and I hope the IRS audits you every year for the rest of your life, you holier-than-thou dickwad.

Please don't try to get me fired, have me deported, have sex with my girlfriend or blow up my house - or whatever it is you normally do to people who disagree with you in your comments section. Thanks.

Though I seriously doubt that anyone is going to be able to sue anyone else for a contract in this case.

You realize that what Nate did was actually perpetuating fraud. He had NO intention to deliver the service he offered, which was writing a paper. He obviously illegally plagiarized the paper which considering this case is about plagiarizing is the not the equivalent of writing a paper. If not the legal principles I question his character and ethics. Deceiving someone to prove their a criminal...

Furthermore, he was reckless and conspired to hurt the reputation, goodwill and assassinate the character of the unnamed. He conspired (may have also committed the act... harder to prove) with several parties to act in a malicious way towards the unnamed party. Discrediting her literacy skills to her worthiness of the deans list.

Lastly, what I do when people are desperate is help find them sources so they can start writing their own paper. I'm not sure what you do.. but basically you would pimp a poor girl if she was desperate and you wanted to teach her a lesson... instead of pointing to the food bank. great. shoot the guy that tries to buy weapons next?

Come to think about it. How do we know that you didn't do this for money and twisted the whole scenario? You accepted a bribe. You were party to any offence she committed since you were clearly conspiring to fraudulently pass over a paper as hers that you stole off several sources. It's like a government official accepting a bribe then calling the police. Sure you called the police but you accepted a bribe.. Have fun at the inquiry.. you have fun next time you do this and get sued. In a civil suit the burden of proof is on a balance of probability. And it's highly probable that you promised fraudulently a service you had no intention of providing then being party to a conspiracy. The balance of damages would likely say fraud and conspiracy to damage her character offends society more than an honour (private contract) code.

What a great guy, Nate. PS I never plagiarised in my life, have a great GPA and hate cheaters.

Section 2-106 of the Uniform Commercial Code deals with definitions of contracts.

"A contract has to be in physical writing, and signed" is an artifact of someone getting their knowledge of law from Hanna-Barbera cartoons.

http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=337&bold=||||

"How can you say a verbal contract is valid in court? You can't prove what another person said. It has to be in writing and signed."

Step 1: Look it up.

Quicken.com has to say about the legality of oral contracts:

"For example, suppose you're opening a new store. You meet with Joe, a sign maker, to discuss the construction and installation of a five-foot by three-foot sign. Joe offers to do the work for $450 and to have the sign ready for your grand opening on June 15. "It's a deal," you say. You now have a legally binding contract, enforceable in court or by arbitration. All the necessary elements are present:

* An Agreement. Joe offered to build and install the sign at a certain price by a certain date. You accepted the offer by telling Joe, "It's a deal."
* Consideration. The two of you are exchanging something of value. You're giving your promise to pay $450. Joe is giving his promise to build and install the sign.
* Written Agreement Not Required Here. Normal business contracts that can be performed in less than a year don?t have to be in writing to be enforceable."

What the heck... are you smoking. Another legal scholar in the mix. Now it's being called a bribe, that's WAY off.

Umm...seriously dude, what the hell are you talking about? Reading inane drivel from holier-than-though jackasses like you on message boards is what makes me sad for humanity. Accepting a bribe? The fuck are you talking about?

Fuck, this is why I rarely read comments or messageboards. Evey dumbass on the planet comes out of the woodwork to spout off ridiculous crap. Now that I think about it...the fuck am I still here fo...*poof*

"What the heck...", you crack me up. Gosh, if you can't trust the random people on IM to do your scholarly work for you anymore, who CAN you trust?

The only thing wrong with this scenario is the fact that we all showed up. That's the only part of it that ever had the potential of doing anything to Laura beyond maybe scaring some sense into her.

Nate didn't even turn her in for it. We did. And he - Nate - didn't intend us to be here. Without us, it just would have been a clever way of showing a bad student that cheating your way to success is a dangerous proposition.

As it stands, these comments have made it far more an examination of us than of Nate or Laura. Fascinating stuff. :)

Let's have a bit of perspective here.

Nate, you obviously never meant for this sort of readership. Granted, it wasn't smart to post her real name etc., but hell, who knew? If only a few dozen people were reading my site, I might have done the same. Most of the "Nate Haters" are basing their hate on the false premise that you were trying to completely destroy a girl. A few dozen readers would never accomplish that, so lay off, folks!

To those who think this is "simply a matter of" something: there is nothing simple about this. What Nate ended up having to do was the virtual equivalent of crowd control. Shit, he's been trying to protect HER from the crowd for the last 2 or 3 days! People become scary in large crowds--even virtual ones.

To those who detect a hint of guilt in Nate: of course he feels sort of bad, because he never intended for it to go so far, and for so many people to call her home and the dean. He wasn't looking for blood. He feels responsible for what the crowd did to her.

So lets turn down the flamethrowers a notch or two, for both Nate and Laura, shall we?

Agreed Eric. At first I thought that Nate was just an insecure asshole. But now I realize he's not much of an asshole. It was "nice" of him to try to help her.

Nicely said, Bloke.

when i google laura i come up with nothing..anyone else?

And you, Eric. And I agree, this is a sociologist's dream.

Um, a verbal contract is enforceable in New York State (except for the sale of real estate). If any lawyer tells you otherwise, go to another one, becuase that one didn't make it out of first-year contracts.

I realize he didn't plan to turn her in, but he was still a dick to her when he found out that other people had. At that point, he should have said "wow, I really fucked up." But he just soldiered on, secure in his knowledge that his shit don't stink. I dunno, obviously it doesn't matter at this point, but I just hope that some day somebody tries to help him and accidentally completely ruins his life. That would be fair, right?

He said the paper was on the Hindu caste system. It was not. He tried to charge her for it, while lying about it. That's fraud. It's too late for him to deny, like some of you are trying. He's told the whole frickin' internet about his fraud. It's out there, and it's too late for him to cover it up.

He didn't run to the authorities to report this heinous crime of her cheating on her homework. He ran to his blog to show everyone how crafty he was. He was not on a mission to save academic integrity. He was on a mission to be a dick, because the opportunity presented itself. He put it all in his blog not because he trying save someone poor university from a wicked cheater, but because he thought it would make him look cool to his friends. He's even confessed this, albeit with a more positive spin to it, by fessing up that he never called the university, and that he thought only his friends would see this.

She cheated on her homework? Big fucking deal. This is so minor of a 'crime' that it has never been illegal anywhere in America, nor will it ever. Is there a more minor 'sin' than cheating on your homework? The only one I can think of is name-calling. Name-calling is a more minor sin than cheating on your homework. That's it.

The universal law of one bitch f*cking over another bitch continues.

Eric,

This was priceless:

"What the heck...", you crack me up. Gosh, if you can't trust the random people on IM to do your scholarly work for you anymore, who CAN you trust?

I cannot believe the number of people who are outraged, OUTRAGED, I TELL YOU!! at Nate for turning in someone who was doing something patently wrong (against the law? probably not, but wrong? absolutely -- I don't think there's any quarrel about that, is there?). It's not like he was trolling the internet offering papers for a price, and then turning his unwitting customers in. Geez.

And as for "ruining her life" -- come on. What a bunch of drama queens.

OK, I have a confession to make: I've plagiarized everything I've ever done, from the day I said my first word (even that first word was just parroted from something my parents said).

I've never spoken an original word in my life. Not one single word. In fact, I don't think I've spoken or written an original SENTENCE in my entire life.

Although my first incidents of plagiarism were actually rewarded -- my parents thought it was impressive when I repeated what they said -- I've spent most of my life trying to disguise the fact that I really don't know anything original.

I first became aware that some people thought plagiarism was bad when I was quite young. Back then, when I would repeat back to kids what they said, they got mad at me -- "why are you repeating what I say?" they'd ask. "Why are you repeating what I say?" I'd reply. Then they'd beat me up.

In school, I ended up walking a tightrope because, on one hand, all my teachers want me to produce "original" ideas. On the other hand, unless I repeat back to them exactly what they taught me (or exactly what I've read in books), I'm "wrong".

For example, I once wrote a paper about how sperm were actually little bitty people. It was totally original -- at least as far as I knew. And I got an F. Then I copied a page out of the encyclopedia describing sperm, and I ALSO got an F. What the heck do they want from me?

So nowadays, I am very careful to change words here and there, to not repeat back EXACTLY what I read or what my professors say, but rather to re-arrange the words a bit, so that they still make sense, but they aren't "plagarism." I haven't gotten into trouble for a while ... who knows how long that will last, though.

Anyway, I'm not sharing my name, because of the obvious hatred here for people like me. But I thought maybe if I confessed now, you'd all go easier on me if somebody eventually exposed me without my knowledge.

Yep, "drama queens" is exactly it. It's not that easy to ruin a life--ask any reporter, they'll tell you! How dare you demean their hard work!

Mr. K, you missed about 4 pages of comments, apparently, wherein we discussed why plagiarism is a serious academic problem, and Dean's List students getting away with it is an affront to education in general. If you think plagiarizing research work shares a seriousness level with name-calling, we probably can't help you.

And yes, Nate wanted to share the trick (and yes, it was one) with his friends. I would've too. Maybe you also missed where he was planning (before we all showed up) to email HER the link to it in hopes of scaring her out of pulling this sort of crap in the future. That would have been a harmless and elegant way of making a point, had it gone as planned.

But then again, since you apparently don't think she did anything wrong, I suppose you don't care. Again, can't help you there.

Mr. K --

If it's no big deal to cheat on your homework, then she shouldn't be embarrassed about the whole world knowing about it, right?

It's pretty obvious that Nate didn't set out to tell the world, but it was Laura who made her bed, she should lie in it. As you say -- it's no big deal, so it shouldn't matter that she's got this petty annoyance on her hands. She was the one looking to cheat -- and when you cheat (or do something else you shouldn't be doing), you take the risk that you're going to get caught and have to pay the consequences. So, I guess she should suffer whatever penalty the university imposes on those caught plagiarizing. If the rest of the world considers plagiarism as petty an offense as you do, no harm, no foul.

I guess she'll never be US Attorney General, but that still leaves her with plenty of options.

I don't know from experience, but I would imagine getting expelled from college could be characterized as ruining your life. I'd say it's probably worse than getting your car towed or having your camera stolen.

OK, I have a confession to make: I've plagiarized everything I've ever done, from the day I said my first word (even that first word was just parroted from something my parents said).

I've never spoken an original word in my life. Not one single word. In fact, I don't think I've spoken or written an original SENTENCE in my entire life.

Although my first incidents of plagiarism were actually rewarded -- my parents thought it was impressive when I repeated what they said -- I've spent most of my life trying to disguise the fact that I really don't know anything original.

I first became aware that some people thought plagiarism was bad when I was quite young. Back then, when I would repeat back to kids what they said, they got mad at me -- "why are you repeating what I say?" they'd ask. "Why are you repeating what I say?" I'd reply. Then they'd beat me up.

In school, I ended up walking a tightrope because, on one hand, all my teachers want me to produce "original" ideas. On the other hand, unless I repeat back to them exactly what they taught me (or exactly what I've read in books), I'm "wrong".

For example, I once wrote a paper about how sperm were actually little bitty people. It was totally original -- at least as far as I knew. And I got an F. Then I copied a page out of the encyclopedia describing sperm, and I ALSO got an F. What the heck do they want from me?

So nowadays, I am very careful to change words here and there, to not repeat back EXACTLY what I read or what my professors say, but rather to re-arrange the words a bit, so that they still make sense, but they aren't "plagarism." I haven't gotten into trouble for a while ... who knows how long that will last, though.

Anyway, I'm not sharing my name, because of the obvious hatred here for people like me. But I thought maybe if I confessed now, you'd all go easier on me if somebody eventually exposed me without my knowledge.

oh puh-leeze. First of all, she won't be expelled from college, in all likelihood, and second of all, while I agree it's not as nice as a hot bath, getting expelled from college can hardly be called "ruining your life". Bill Gates never finished college, and he did all right.

Heheh, somehow I doubt Laura has the business sense of Bill Gates. But no, the worst that'll happen is she'll fail the class.

This was thoroughly entertaining. A job well done.

I'm conflicted because I agree that plagiarism is bad, and I don't know the best way to curtail it. If a professor had found her out, that would be one thing. But this vigilantism is a different story. If he didn't intend to turn her in and get her expelled, fine. Then his action of posting her real name and college on the internet was merely careless. What I don't like about Nate and his supporters is that now that all is said and done, and this chick has been busted dramatically by the dean, Nate still doesn't feel bad about it. Nate might have done the "right" thing, but I still think he's an asshole.

The contract was in fact in written form. The IMs exchanged were in written form and should the kid had sense enough to keep em, I hope she gets in touch with me.

did anyone else find it just a little too coincidental that her last name is "Krishna" and she was looking for someone to write her paper on Hinduism? wouldn't it be funny if she were a psychology or an ethics student doing a study to see if anyone would help a plagiarist? or, better yet, wouldn't it be really funny if this whole thing were fiction?

Eric, if you seriously believe cheating on your homework is a major crime, you could surely offer at least one crime that is more minor than cheating on your homework. Purse-snatching? Car-keying? Graffiti? After your four pages of discussion I'm sure you must have some idea of a crime more minor than cheating on your homework.

You're attempts to justify Nate's actions were based on him trying to protect academic integrity. It's been revealed (by Nate himself) that Nate took his actions not to protect academic integrity, but to show off to his friends. To continue using the defense that he was protecting academic integrity is blatantly dishonest. He wanted to hurt somebody for the sole purpose of having a good story to tell. Like you yourself pointed out, he then wanted to rub her nose in it. Which he did.

Nate Kushner is not the Champion and Savior of all Universities and Colleges. He's just some malicious prick who saw an opportunity to cause pain, and he jumped on it.

Wouldn't it be funny if people actually read before commenting. Then they would know the "Krishna" name is made up. lolz

Well, DTB2, if she does get expelled, at least that academic achievement will be based on her own work.

My husband teaches. I thought he was being a softie when he decided to deal with plagiarists in his classes by failing them for the course but not formally reporting them to the university (which has an official policy of expelling all plagiarists). Then he discovered that the head of his department routinely let plagiarizing students rewrite, with no report being added to their records (so they get the chance to do it again, and again).

Frankly, having your real name spread about the internet probably comes closer to "ruining your life" than being expelled.

I am surprised by how many people seem to think that people should not be responsible for their own actions. This is the one thing that I can't understand about the anti-Nate side.

It's been stated ad nauseum that she made the mistake, and now must deal with the repurcussions. Yet there is still argument that Nate ruined her life. Would we blame him if she jumped in front of his moving vehicle? I guess the Nate-haters think that society is a safety net to catch our mistakes - that is, everyone is responsible for my own actions but me.

HOW CAN YOU PEOPLE GO ON LIKE THIS WHEN TERRI SCHAVO IS FIGHTING FOR HER LIFE!!!!!! Get some perspective, people!!!!

Get over it Mr.K, you can't win here, you're wrong, get over it.

Copying other peoples words and thoughts may not be a crime to you but it's likely you've never produced anything of value. If you had, you'd know what it might feel like to have something like that taken from you.

"HOW CAN YOU PEOPLE GO ON LIKE THIS WHEN TERRI SCHAVO IS FIGHTING FOR HER LIFE!!!!!! Get some perspective, people!!!!"

Now that is funny shit. Her story is just as unworthy of recognition as this one is. The media is patheitc and has sensationalized it. You're sad if that's what has you concerned.

Nate-

You should have changed her last name to X, you're confusing all the stoners...

Mike:

Yet you're still here....

Did anyone else find it just a little too coincidental that her first name is Laura and that she is a girl?

Tube;

I'm still here because I've been killing time at work all day, that will end in about 2 minutes. I know I said it's insignificant but I love having debates like this, it's amusing to me.

I thought this blog was entertaining, though i feel great sympathy for the girl in the HUGE way this has been publicised. This is really between her and her college, it has nothing to do with us.

I'm frankly extremely disappointed in those who have contacted either Nate OR Laura for the sole intention of forcing their negative views on them- i'm sure they automatically thanked you for the inspirational light you gave them, NOT. That's so obviously stupid and wrong words cannot even begin to describe. i bet you're the kind of people who reverse down motorways...

Anyhow, The cheeky side of me can't help but see that the plan Nate came up with, were i in his position would have been at the very least, extremely tempting. Really, it's her persistance and lack of apologetic tone that gets me. But i do feel sorry for her because of the overwhelming sense of shame she must now feel.

^Sean, yeah that's a good point, and man would i ever LOVE to be a psychology student in that position :D Don't know why i just think it would be fun lol.

It's a shame she had to learn the hard way, but i can't honestly think of what i would do in that position. Maybe said something like 'yeah sure, and credit would go to me right?' and try and send her on a guilt trip. Maybe made up a story about a friend who plagiarised in school and ended up in prison hehe :D

Seriously though - I hope that once Laura has learned the error of her ways that she can move on without this haunting her. That's my main concern really.

SparkyCola

ps- i apologise for the rambling / stream-of-thought like quality to that post, it's very late!

"Eric, if you seriously believe cheating on your homework is a major crime, you could surely offer at least one crime that is more minor than cheating on your homework. Purse-snatching? Car-keying? Graffiti? After your four pages of discussion I'm sure you must have some idea of a crime more minor than cheating on your homework."

I laid this out for cetacean already, but apparently I need to again. He actually agreed with me, just not with what's happened here.

Plagiarism devalues degrees. A degree is SUPPOSED to indicate to the rest of the world that its holder has earned it through hard work and the acquisition of knowledge. That has a tangible real-world value.

If someone cheats their way into a degree, they are obtaining something they didn't earn that they will then trade on. They'll use it to compete with people who DID earn their degrees, and if they succeed in getting a job / grad school invite / whatever with it, they have both stolen that success from someone who earned it, and devalued educational degrees in general.

Equating it to a crime is pretty damned silly (since you didn't even start with that, you started with "sin" and compared it to "name calling"), but if you really want to run with it, obtaining a degree that way is probably roughly comparable to theft. You've obtained payment for your work without doing the work. When you get out of that work by substituting someone else's, it's called "plagiarism."

I should not need to go over why this is wrong, but fine, there, I did. Your statement that his intent was only to show off to his friends is still false. His intent was to scare her by demonstrating that her misstep could in fact be shown to the world. Is that a snarky way to go about it? Yup, he's a kinda snarky guy. But it wouldn't have actually hurt her.

Problem is, thanks to us, it actually WAS shown to the world. How much this hurts her is yet to be seen, I suppose, but I'm quite sure he'll feel bad if it's anywhere near as severe as you people seem to feel it'll be.

DTB2, I don't give a damn about her embarrassment, really. What's shitty is the huge number of malicious pricks on the internet who, like Nate, are looking for an opportunity to be a shithead to someone. They are shown that they can get away with fucking with this chick, and maybe even get treated like a some kind of hero at the same time. Like has been done with Nate.

Nate was trying to post as much personal information about her as he could. He got her middle initial, corrected the name of the school, and tried finding out the name of the class and the professor. When people started posting her phone number and address to his blog, he probably started having a change of heart (he did censor that kind of stuff as fast as could reasonably be expected). But he was the one handing out pitchforks in the first place, and he was going around posting his blog to other sites, trying to spread the word.

He tried to create a scenario where many people where attacking this chick. Maybe it was unintentional, as he claims, but it takes a very small amount of thought to predict the outcome of this. He either didn't do it, or did do it and didn't care. Either way, that makes him a thoughtless prick. He's recieved his degree, and is still this thoughtless. Him having an degree is more damaging to the value of my degree than her cheating on her Hindu homework.

She may be a bad person for intending to plagiarize, but that doesn't validate treating her like you did. What you did was both cruel, and unusual. No matter how heinous the crime that someone in this country commits, punishment like the kind that you brewed up is illegal. You can try to justify it to yourself all you want, or your internet toadies can pitch in for you, but it will never validate, never justify, what you've done.

Turning in someone for plagiarism is one thing, whipping it up into a fiasco that you could use to try and publicize yourself and your crappy sketch comedy troupe is another. The school would have seen to it that she was justly disciplined. Your "help" wasn't needed, and it's really very sad that you take pride in this. Making someone needlessly miserable, shaming them publicly, all so you can get some people to visit your website...that's more pathetic than this girl's attempt to get out of doing her schoolwork.

You're no better than the person that you're holding up for mockery. At least she didn't brag to the world that she was a scumbag plagiarist just so she could get some attention. Go ahead and be a hero to hundreds of websurfing pricks, bask in your fifteen minutes of fame, revel in it. If that's the kind of person that thinks you're cool, that speaks volumes.

Go ahead and keep telling yourself it doesn't bother you. My advice to you is to get some therapy while your parents will still pay for it, before you end up begging on the streets of Manhattan after your dreams of making it big in the comedy business fall apart.

It's too bad your sketch comedy isn't good enough that you could get this kind of attention for that. Instead you have to do something cruel and unnecessary and pander to the lowest common denominator. Real talent stands on its own, and doesn't need to create bogus controvers to promote itself. Congratulations on becoming more well-known for being a jerk than on being a good comedy group.

This thread could go on forever. You guys are now discussing exactly what was discussed earlier. Haven't read all the previous posts, eh?

I think we need more comments on this comment.

OK, I seriously have to go produce something of value for my employer. But first..

Yes, what she did is wrong. How wrong? It's subjective. We can all agree on that.

My point is that everyone makes mistakes. My point is, how would Nate feel if self-righteous do-gooders like himself turned him in and exposed him to the internet every time he broke the speed limit or did something unethical or immoral in his own life? It would probably make him feel bad. Nobody is perfect. Yes, the girl should will have to deal with her situation. Her own actions were the main cause of it. Nate's actions also contributed to her situation. The girl should feel bad about herself that she would cheat, be dumb, get caught, etc. And Nate should feel bad about himself for being a huge asshole. He saw this chick stumbling towards the open elevator shaft and rather than hold her back he gave her a swift kick in the ass. Plagiarism is bad. Nate is an asshole.

you know, i was on the appeals on academic discipline committee at my university and i had a student come in complete with lawyer and crying mother. i threw the book at the asshole and increased his sentence because his crime was so aggregious (it was an assault). The sad mother thing though really annoyed me, grow up and accept the consequences for your actions. she will probably get turfed for 12 months with notations on her transcripts for 2 years...and hopefully every paper she writes from now on will pass through turnitin.com.

I think, Mssr. K, that the reason why so many people are cheering on Nate and the whole idea of fucking up Laura's life is precisely because this nation has long lived under the auspices of "It's not the culprit's fault, it's everyone else."

Responsibility and accountability have gone out the window. Although I have since rethought and refined my stance somewhat -- I think Nate should NOT have published her real name or university -- I remain firm that she bloody well deserves to be expelled with extreme prejudice.

I think people are just tired of all of the whining coming from the mouths of the guilty. They did wrong, they should pay, and pay like hell. So Laura (I feel some measure of pity for her now) gets to be the undeserving focus of everyone's pent-up ire.

Nate, I realize that you're not one hundred percent proud of what's happened, but is it possible with your Perl scripting wizardry to automatically change any comments involving how much people think you suck to say the following:

"Nate, you're a goddamn hero-genius."

I think I'd let my anti-censorship beliefs slide for that one.

FTP,LTR:

People prefer bloviating over reading.

Does anyone else find this blog hilarious?? I'm not reading this blog for "information" sake, I'm reading it for pure hilarity.

Mr. K has a point about the contact info.

I doubt that A Week of Kindness would like it very much is someone went to www.netsol.com and did a search on their domain name, and suddenly people started calling up Mike Still and giving him a hard time, or sending him mail at his apartment in Brooklyn, or email at his comcast.net address.

Perl scripting wizardry, yeah, that's the ticket. That's *exactly* what happened.

I wonder if X would like some email to X's X@x.org address, huh?

can somebody post some smart commentary? I'm getting bored.

screw you guys. I'm going home

OH NOES!!!111 teh Bl0g 1t iz n0w suXX0rz!!!111one

Did you have to take a retard course to learn how to type like that?

It's just like 133t sp33k. But douche-yer.

Okay, I think it's time for the false statement that Nate ran around posting the blog to other sites to stop. He shared it with his friends, as he figured they'd get a laugh. They shared it with other friends. They (I should say "we", I was one of them) shared it with other friends, and with links sites. THIS WAS OUR FAULT, not his.

Nate did not do this anywhere that I saw, nor as far as I can tell did he intend it to happen. Until Mr K or anyone else can show me where he did, this is a completely BS reason to claim he was out for fame.

And as for your statement that he did it to promote his comedy troupe, that's goddamned ridiculous, and I'm grateful that at least most of the people who read through this fiasco know that.

Something just occured to me,

"i can pay by the page by the word i don't care"

Who would have thought of that, or even entertained it? by the word? I think she has done this before. Only someone with experience would spring this on some random person at the last minute and agree to whatever terms. As far as her mom goes, sounds to me like they dopnt want a scandal or "damage thier good name" It's a real problem in social circles.

It's really too bad, she would have been caught sooner or later. One can only be an airhead for so long. As far as plagerism goes, yes it's a crime in the US, a VERY serious crime. But I would have loved it if everyone had kept quiet until Nate sprung his diabolical scheme on her, unfortunately the net is populated by sheeple. Whoever contacted her or the Dean should be ashamed of themselves. That was entireley Nates duty. Nate, I fully understand your intentions. To those of you who cant handle it or feel it's your duty to inform others about how self righteous you are, go cry about it on Jerry Springer. Kudos Nate, perhaps not a perfect victory, but a victory nonetheless.

Haha, sheeple.

I doubt that this is an act of hostility on Nate's part. He saw an instance of dishonesty and extreme human stupidity, and he came to the conclusion that this individual needed reprimanding. What Laura was attempting to do was not virtuous. The end at which she was aiming was cheating—a breach of school policy. Furthermore, she was doing it in the wrong manner. If I had to advocate a form of cheating, I would advocate cheating in an intelligent manner, regardless of the fact that calculation of a vice is morally worse. She tried to cheat through the wrong person, at the wrong time, and to the wrong extent. People get caught when they try to pull off something of which they aren’t capable.

Mistake number one: Cheating. An obvious breach of university policy, punishable if caught. She gambled, and she lost—big time.

Mistake number two: Contacting and trusting a complete stranger. If you cheat, cheat off a friend who you can be sure won’t spill it.

Mistake number three: Her attempt was made in a desperate time of night (I presume). Regardless, time was a factor that caused her desperation, which led to the contact and trust of a stranger. Cheating should be done in a lenient manner, so that you won’t act in rash and asinine manners.

Mistake number four: The magnitude. She attempted a rather large vice. Plump, juicy, and ever so tantalizing. Shame on her. If she had read Aristotle’s “Ethics”, she would know that an excess of anything is a vice; one must aim for the median. Cheating would be a deficiency of honesty, and then there are degrees of cheating. She chose an excess of this deficiency, and thus lacks practical and theoretical wisdom, intelligence, and morals.

Enough of my pretentious ramblings on virtue. I think I have demonstrated that not only is Laura immoral in motive and execution, but also a dumbass. People like that do not listen to the voice of reason, and are so base that only pleasures and pains affect their judgments and actions. A dumbass of this caliber would probably not listen to the scoldings of one of her dearest friends; how less likely is it that she would take to heart the reproaches of a stranger over the internet? Nate should be praised—he took the only correct option, one that resulted in the blatant indication of her faults. This was the only way she could possibly ever learn. If she learns from this mistake, she will be a better person, and will owe it all to Nate! If she doesn’t learn, she doesn’t even deserve our pity. It’s survival of the fittest, and this lesson will ultimately serve her well.

No I didn't take a course. I'm a net anthropologist, doing my post-doc on AOL.

I think I have the language just about down pat too. And you're right, the DQ (Douche Quotient) is really, truly right the fuck up there.

W00t! i 4m TEH WINNAR!!!!111eleven

@xamyel: I just wanted to comment on your comment: "It's really too bad, she would have been caught sooner or later".

You'd be surprised how long someone can go through life, in academia and the office, skimming by on other people's work. I knew a bitch like that at work who basically admitted to plagiarizing her homework during college and once at work was using her "friends" to do her work as well. Last I knew she transferred to another department. Hopefully one which fits her skillset better.

With a couple of notable exceptions, I think we may have reached that magical point on the timeline of any internet "discussion" where the signal to noise ratio indicates a proper close. Frankly, I'm impressed we lasted this long. It usually takes hours, not days.

All the good points either for or against Nate, Laura, and ourselves have probably been made in the pages of discussion up to this point, and people can read those pages and decide for themselves.

They're going to keep discussing it on other message boards ad nauseum anyhow, AWOK. Don't let it clutter yours indefinitely unless you want it to. ;-)

I disagree that LKP's mom is nice. I've spent a lot of time working in the service industry, and have quite a few friends who have as well; including in Universities.

Her mom is either a clueless idiot, or is an entitlement queen trying to make sure that her daughter gets "the degree that I'm paying for". She's likely the type of mother who harrasses professors for giving bad grades, regardless of how poorly her child is doing. "I am paying you people to teach my daughter, and you're not going to give her bad grades like this. It's not her fault, it's yours." Which would explain her daughter's complete lack of ethics in this matter.

This was obviously not the first time this women (she is not a child, not if she's in her third year) has done this. If not outright conned someone else into doing the work for her, she's certainly used plagiarism and manipulation of others to her benefit in the past; and gotten away with it. It's very easy to do if you're female and young enough. A few tears with a "poor misled young woman, barely begun down the wrong path" sob story. Bullshit. Seen it way too many times, know too many girls in high-school and college who bragged about how they could get away with anything simply by crying or flirting enough.

Is it doing any good to take her name off your site when the words "Laura_K_RealName_is" are right there in the URL?

The number of people whining about Nate "ruining Laura's life" is STAGGERING. Absolutely staggering. So you would rather let her slide through college without actually working or using any intelligence, and "earn" a degree that she didn't actually earn? And especially in the department of EDUCATION?! I hope none of you people have any young kids, because for all you know, she could be their teacher someday. The fact of the matter is that she did something wrong. I don't care if you agree with his method or not. It's still better than letting her, or ANYONE else, get away with it and further decrease the worth and meaning of a college degree. It's people like you who allow idiots to flourish in our society. Everyone is so anti-consequences these days. I honestly can't see why. What's the good in that?

All your base are belong to us.

is it really THAT FUNNY to make fun of commenters who disagree with you with "OMGLOLZ," "!!!111eleven," or "EYE SPELD DIS RONG" when nobody here seriously typed a comment like that?

Wired says "comment spam" is "tired."

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet; I've read most of the comments but not all of the newest page.

On the last thread a lot of people accused those who are delighting in Laura's suffering of sexism, claiming that characterizing her as some "dumb girl/bitch" enhanced the thrill of tormenting her.

But I think it balances out--I believe the fact she's a girl wins her a lot of sympathy that she wouldn't be getting if she were some guy. Admit it--this wouldn't seem nearly so morally dubious if it weren't a guy picking on a girl.

If the plagiarist were another guy, it would be even easier to villainize him in our heads. He would just be some lazy prick who wanted to buy a paper, not a poor, victimized desperate girl. I think a lot fewer people would be worried about how sad it is that his life may or may not be ruined.

I completely agree with Kenny.

I remember back when comment spam was the coolest thing ever. Wired sure does know when to call 'em.

How was I make fun of commenters who disagreed with me? I disupted their points with logic. I wrote in L33tSp33k to flag a noise-signal ratio change.

Or is that sort of thing far too subtle for you to grasp?

Eric, you answered with cheating on homework is comparable with theft. Although that's more of answer than I expected, It doesn't really say what crime less minor. But I'm going to make it easy on you, because I'd truly like to see an honest answer to this. So here's a scale of different thefts:

Corporate cookbooking for millions of dollars
Bank robbery
Car jacking
Purse snatching
Shoplifting
Reading magazines at the magazine rack
Downloading mp3s
Reading books at the library

So cheating on your homework is worse than which of these thefts? (The last three I don't conseder as theft, I'm just trying to bend over backwards to help you show me how heinous it is to cheat on your homework.)

To clear something up, I never made any claim that Nate did it for fame, or to promote his troupe. I said he did it to show off to his his friends (which I don't think we are in disagreement about), and to maliciously cause pain to someone that he thought he could get away with (we may disagree here). It was you and his other friends that ran around to other websites passing out pitchforks? Fine, I believe that. But it just means you guys are just as malicious and thoughtless as he is. It was ridiculously naive to not be aware of the consequences.

I'm sorry, I have to go. I really need to get started on my homework. Seriously. (Psst, anyone want to make a quick 75 bucks?)

Man, one of my favorite time-wasters is to go to the bookstore and read magazines.

I've got a scenario for those people who think Nate breached some type of "contract" (especially Mr. K and "what the heck..."):
Mr. Chivas hires me to go murder Ms. Krishna, and agrees to pay me $500 upon seeing evidence of the completed task . I decide to instead buy a dummy and use that as my proof of a dead Ms. Krishna. But Mr. Chivas realizes that it's a dummy. Question: Shouldn't Mr. Chivas shoot me, because I obviously breached our contract?

Of course not, you morons. I personally think people like you should no longer be allowed to use the internets.

And for those who insist that Nate did something cruel and mean, let's briefly examine what would have transpired, had knowledge of this blog not left the confines of this website: Nate sends Laura the paper, posts about it in the blog, all 30 people who normally read this blog would have gotten a good laugh(remember, this is a sketch comedy website...the regular readers would have eaten this up), Laura turns in paper, professor realizes it's a fraud, notifies dean, Laura's investigated, and severe punishment is handed down. Nate's involvement doesn't even matter, because he either wouldn't have done anything at all, or he would have notified the dean 3 days later, after all action has taken place.

Now, as for the current situation: Nate writes about the entire affair in blog, thousands of people read about it, Laura turns in paper, a few incredible idiots with no life call up the dean and Laura, they both become aware of what has just occurred, PLUS the dean finds out that Laura's now been humiliated all over the internet. Result: slightly reduced punishment for Laura, seeing as how the problem was caught earlier, and Laura already has to endure the torture of having her name smeared everywhere.

So, all in all, Nate actually did Laura a FAVOR by posting the saga here for everyone to see. Therefore, you pussies need to stop your whining about "Nate is such an incredibly cruel asshole." Seriously, grow up and grow some balls. We should all strive to be more like Nate.

Nate wins the internets.

HEY GUYZ!! =) Well, since Nate went ahead and ruined my life and got me kicked out of college, I was wondering if you could proofread my resume. No, I didn't actually write it myself but my roommate was around to "help out"!! *giggle*

Laura K. KRISHNA
XXX xX XXXX
XXX X XX XXXX

Job Description Sought: (Rear) entry-level position in the adult film, magazine industry.

Qualifications:
- No self respect. Amply demonstrated whorish behavior throughout time in school.
- Poor verbal communication skills but able to repeat on-cue simple phrases such as, "Yeah, baby!" and "Ooooooh It's SOOOOO big!".
- Willing to provide own condoms.

Job Experience:
- Blowjobs for better grades througout high school, college.
- Have repeatedly "fucked" over others in my classes, AOL chatrooms.

References:
- Available upon request

COULD YOU GUYZ LET ME KNOW WHUT YOU THINK???? Also, please pass this along to any industry contacts you have. I'd really like to make the big money because I know I'm worth it, but please kind of just mention that I'm very very desperate right now and if I were sufficiently coked-up I would probably sign just about anything!!!

THANKS GUYZ!!!

*Hugz*
Laura

Actually, I responded that comparing it to a crime was pretty damned silly, especially since you started out with trying to compare it to "sin" (which NOBODY can agree on...), and then I played along anyhow just for fun.

Besides, if you really have to go, why am I responding when you won't read it? ;-) Ah well.

My answer is that it absolutely does not matter which of your listed crimes it is more or less severe than. On a rough average, if this behavior helps her get a degree and a job that should've gone to someone else, it would probably cost that other person more than a purse snatching or shoplifting, but it's totally irrelevant. Reading books at a library is not a theft of any kind, legal or ethical, so you're way off base there.

Are we who spread it around malicious? Perhaps - as I said, this whole thing is much more an expose of you and I than of Nate and Laura, by sheer volume. I spread it around because it was damn good drama and before he retracted his "I've already emailed the dean" statement I thought the cat was already out of the bag. I feel bad for Nate that it spiralled so far out of his control when he didn't intend it to - I didn't realize he wanted it to be small.

None of that makes him in any way culpable regarding the people who went to the lengths of finding her phone number and calling her, or the dean. That was, frankly, just sick of them. He didn't even intend us to be voyeurs in this, but being voyeurs did not give anyone a right to become a participant.

@SOS

Yeah I've known quit a large number of people who've taken credit for others work, and almost all of them recieved thier comeuppance at some point or another. I'm no college grad, no desire to be, I do find it hard in the workplace to trust every Joe/Jane Doe college grad though. You never know if thier knowledge was really earned or bought. But thats just my opinion...

You have Nate posting stuff like this and you expect people to buy that he wanted to "keep it small"?

"Hell, I would have liked to have milked this thing for a while longer. Such sweet traffic, it’s a shame that the end had to come so soon after the middle. "

"Maybe we’d get a couple extra people out to our sketch shows."

Everything he posted lent to feeding this. If he really wanted to stop it, he would have stopped posting it publicly, and just emailed it to his friends. If he cared now, he'd take all these posts as well as his own posting of the whole thing off of this site. As long as it stays up, it's testament to Nate wanting this to be seen publicly, and to get all the attention he can from it.

If Nate got what he wanted, which was to see this girl punished for her plagiarism, if we take him at his word, then he's done it. Man up and take all this crap down off the web. You achieved your goal, there is no point in leaving this online.

It's pretty funny. XD Damn funny, and in terms of 'eventually you're going to get screwed over for the dumb shit you do' she was. But I think you feel pretty bad too, huh?

Too bad it wasn't a victory or anything, your moral guilt and her expulsion. You didn't even get your $75.00. :<

I repeat: Tools, the lot.

Hunh. Well, actually, yeah, I guess X has a point I can't really argue with.

Though I'm sure the world would be full of people ranting aimlessly about how Nate was "covering his shame" or some such crap, the only way to reverse at all the high level of publicity - or imply regret at it - might be to simply take it down now that all is done.

Nate? The idea may have merit. You still haven't retracted anything if it just disappears.

Well, Nate...I just have to say this...I am a university student, and I have never cheated/plagiarised in an exam/assignment, although I have witnessed many doing so. The lecturers are well aware of it but no one wants to actually take measures to stop it, which is very frustrating for people like me.

Thus, on one hand, I applaud you for doing something to apprehend a plagiarist. And I have to admit you did it in a very amusing and entertaining way. And the fact that this blog was passed to me, and I in turn passed it on to others is an indication that this may serve as a warning to many other people.

However, I also feel really sorry for her...this is the sort of thing that can come back to haunt you in a decade, never mind what she has to go through now. And we all make mistakes, and this girl is probably not the most perceptive, nor moral person, and probably succumbed to fear when confronted with her dean.

While I think you went about it well, giving her chances to back out, etc...and I think you were nice to her and her mom later on...I do wish you hadn't given out her details, because you/other people didn't give her a chance to learn her lesson, but rather force fed it to her.

Ok, plagarism is theft, comparable to using stolen credit cards. She was taking credit that she knew was not hers. On top of being a theif, this girl is also stupid by not knowing an obvious con when she sees it, and by not knowing a laughably bad paper when she sees it. The justice here is that this time around she got her comuppance, where before she probably got A's. As a college student who works his ass off for the B's he gets I resent the fact that I have peers who can BUY better grades than me. Was Nate a complete and total dick to her? Of course, but someone had to be and at least he had the common decency to be funny as well. What has come out of this debacle? I got a few laughs and an airheaded bimbo WHO ISN'T EVEN COLLEGE MATERIAL IN THE FIRST PLACE gets her commupance. The world is in balance once again. I just hope she's attractive so she can skate by on her looks like she's supposed to.

april fools?

Umm....can anyone tell young buck what month APRIL fools takes place in?

In the end, I don't think Laura came to the level of morally redeemable. I mean how could you believe someone who couldn't even bother to pay for the work she'd commissioned was telling the truth when she said she'd "never done it before."

But I definitely understand not wanting to be the root cause of someone’s downfall. My guess is that she just wanted her name taken off the site and hadn’t even turned in the paper.

I have a calendar. It's filled with gorgeous broads. My favorite is the one for april. You see, it's always april in my love shack.

The only thing that makes this seem remotely like a hoax to me is the fact that this girl just contacted Nate out of nowhere, and he just happened to be a comedy writer with a weblog and a troup to promote.

Even if this is fake, however, I must say that it was a very entertaining read and you deserve all the extra traffic you get. I mean, that one lady who sold a Virgin Mary sandwich on eBay for twenty-thousand bucks probably knew what type of racket she was running, but she was lucky and it was a clever idea to appeal to novelty-lovers and overzealous religious enthusiasts, whether or not it was done intentionally.

Anyways, I hope the grapevine brings the news of the aftermath to you, Nate. When you get it, I hope you share it because I would like to have closure on this story (and I'm curious).

I didn't read every comment to see if anyone had said this. What Laura did was wrong. However, what Nate did was not right. You assisted in the dishonesty, for the sole reason of busting her. If a drug dealer asked you to cook some meth, would you do it for the sole reason of calling the police? Of course not, because you'd be as guilty as him. That's true in this case also. You may have intended some humor and some lesson, but it backfired.

It's hilarious how many people are appalled by the injustice of Laura K. Krishna's failure to pay the $75, citing this as the main demonstration of her dishonesty.

I mean this is the internet, people, and it's filled with real humans who are dishonest, especially when it comes to money. That's why you don't give out personal info online. Sheesh.

I mean, whoever was kidding themselves into thinking that Laura was actually going to pay up needs a reality smack upside the head. I mean, she is just a dumb kid...

Most of the people trashing Nate for his cruelty and arrogance seem incapable of spelling "plagiarism" correctly, despite its frequent appearance in this saga. They also have issues with punctuation.

Eeeeenteresting.

Even granting that Nate shouldn't have posted her full name on the internet, I can do no less than commend the man.

I THINK ANY ONE OF US COULD HAVE MOLESTED AND STRANGLED A 7-YEAR-OLD BLACK GIRL IN A CASINO TOILET SO DON'T BE JUDGING ME YOUR "HONOR"

who, like Nate, are looking for an opportunity to be a shithead to someone.

Dude, did you *read* the IM script? He was practically desperate for her to back out of the deal, giving her opportunity after opportunity to notice that he was just messing with her.

That said, as someone who has caught plagiarists before at the graduate level, I don't just approve of Nathan's actions, I am deeply grateful for the service he's provided. Yeah, she should be humiliated, because she did a dishonest and really stupid thing. She should also be expelled, but she'll probably just fail the class, which is okay.

okay - this may be a unpopular viewpoint, but has anyone else considered whether any of this is actually true. has anyone tried to google "Laura K. Krishna" or India Univeristy. maybe my google is broke...

mind you -i'm not looking to ruin this. it was the high point of my day...er..week. classic.

Wiegehts, her name and the name of the university were changed by her request. Like it says right in this entry. :P

thanks leesha - must've missed that :P

I think the real lesson here isn't that plagiarism is bad.(Though it certainly is.) The real lesson here is that if you randomly choose people off the Internet, you have no idea who you're talking to. So until you know otherwise, you should always assume you're talking to a comedian with a blog.

Laura is a weasel. She didn't want to do her own work, she lied about being willing to pay to get somebody to write her a paper, she lied to avoid dealing with him when he shows up for payment, she lied about confessing to her dean, and her whole focus was on dodging responsibility and saving herself from the consequences of her actions.

She's not just a dumb kid. She's a complete weasel, and she's given no indication that she's even learned anything from the experience.

You showed mercy. That's what it is called and it is OK.

wiegehts, sorry, but you missing "that" basically tells us you don't even know what website you're looking at.

Yeah, it was changed. You can find it readily. There's still several places calling it a hoax built to promote the comedy troup. I don't really care. As far as doing a service, being dishonest to bust someone for being dishonest is not copacetic.

Well I'm not interested debating in the authenticity of the story, but at least it could serve a good reminder for students not to plagarize or ask other people to do their homework for them without putting a single ounce of effort in double checking or going over the result. Its just too prevalent these days, sometimes I wonder as educators has it just become so common that educators just simply turn a blind eye? By all means, somehow I have to admit I'm feeling jaded along with many of my colleagues also.

'Way back up yonder, someone said, in defense of Ms. what-a-coincidence-she's-named Krishna: "My point is that everyone makes mistakes."

Nope. Using "there" instead of "their" in a sentence is a mistake. Tracking someone down on the net to write a paper, offering to pay with -- most likely -- no intention of actually doing so, and not owning up to the plagiarism when she was caught: this is no *mistake*. It's dishonesty plain and simple.

I have no sympathy for the woman whom some have called a "poor naive girl." Bunch of suckers.

Bill, would you rather have had Nate write an actual paper for her? Cuz THAT certainly wouldn't have been dishonest, no sirree...

Bill wrote:

What Laura did was wrong. However, what Nate did was not right. You assisted in the dishonesty, for the sole reason of busting her. If a drug dealer asked you to cook some meth, would you do it for the sole reason of calling the police?

Uh... yeah. Except cooking meth (cooking? really?) isn't legal; forwarding proof of someone's misdeeds is. Were you wearing a wire when someone asks you to cook up some meth, and then send the tape to the police, is that wrong too?

I'm bothered by the glee so many people are expressing when it is not clear what if any cheating has occurred. A woman has been electronically tarred and feathered in the most public of ways by a single person acting independently, outside of any system of justice with no opportunity for his target to defend herself. If she didn't turn in the purchased paper she is guilty of nothing. If Nate made up some of this or reported some of the story in error, a completely innocent person has been harmed. (Frankly, who the hell is Nate? Why should we believe any of his story?)

Please do not misinterpret my comment above to mean I condone plagerism or cheating. I do not. What I find distrubing is this notion of one-man judge-jury-executioner. If Nate had informed the college of the "offense" and cooperated in their investigation, that would have been ethical. However, publishing all this on a blog is completely irresponsible.

Nate, pls don't take this down. Teachers everywhere will want to link their students to the saga to inspire class discussion of plagiarism and ethics. Help other students learn this lesson by keeping this story accessible somehow.

AndyS, if you had read Nate's previous post, you would know that she did, in fact, turn in the paper. This is just a thread to continue the discussion that was started over there. It's really worth your time to brush up before you weigh in.

This has to be a hoax. I don't believe that there's a girl named Laura Krishna and India University is just too fishy sounding to me. Also, I think playjerizam is wrong and that Nate is mean.

"Also, just to keep the ball rolling, anyone who believes in Karma is a shithead who should be forced to eat drano until they die."

Lemme guess, you believe in the bible. Literally, no doubt. Moron.

i just wasted way too much time reading this when i should have been writing my own papers. i think what you did was wonderful. not because it was mean or anything but because im so sick of people flying through wiht minimal work. my only wondering is what in the world was she doing while you were writing the paper? she was obviously arond her computer. people annoy me.

oh, and i can't believe she didn't even read the paper. What a bozo. I know I would have read a paper that i had someone else write for me.

Ok, so first of all I just stumbled upon this whole thing in the last hour or two (been reading since). And my first thought was "Her name's Krishna? And he believes that?" And just about then I realized I was an idiot...Anywhoo, to the point. I'm a little saddened by the vast majority of the responses to this. Did she do something stupid? Yes. Did she deserve what she got? Quite probably (though it was bad luck on her part, as I'm sure this happens rather often, just without the huge event). But the girl is obviously being hurt by this whole thing, quite possibly seriously. And you people take pleasure in that? Regardless of whether or not she had it coming, that's just depressing.

_Ross

Wow, seems like a lot of people felt personally vindicated by your actions Nate, especially among the Academic community. Furthermore, it's amazing how small and intimate our world has become thanks to the Internet. Sadly though, one thing seems to never change- that people still love to see someone get thrown to the lions.

She's a greasy skeeze, and she deserves to get tossed on her ass by the Dean that she LIED TO. Her whole house of cards is crumbling around her, and hopefully it crushes her.

And if her mother was such a good person, she would have taught her child to do her own work, not copy off of others.

I hope she enjoys her new job at McDonalds, sweeping the floor.

Dear Ross,

I don't know about others, but I do sort of cringe for the girl, and feel sorry for her in as much as she was left standing when the music stopped (as it were) and finds herself in the unlucky position of taking the fall for what is likely a not-too-uncommon practice among college students. I (for one -- and I'm probably not the only one) don't take the least pleasure in her misfortune; however, I cannot understand (someone called it "staggering" -- it's the perfect word) how people can come up with excuses for her.

Firstly, I think both of you are gonna suffer Karma problems after this. Secondly, Nate man, you crossed your fingers like a little kid on the playground. What ever happend to "damn the man" and occasional student solidarity against the evil forces of homework? She wasn't hurting anyone but herself. Why help her with that? Take the money or turn her over with out profitting from it, but not both dude. Seriously. Thats pretty rough. She could've been a babe that you were destined to meet. But now its just a mess of bloggers and crappy mean spirited internet sillyness. I'm not attacking either of you. I see a cleverness behing your approach to this, and yeah, its pretty funny as she did totally leave herself open for it. But the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Peace.

Moral of the story: If you're going to do something stupid, get your mommy to bail you out.

Oh, and NONE of you EVER did anything you weren't supposed to!!! ESPECIALLY NOT IN COLLEGE--THE RULES!!! THE RULES!!! OH GOSH I'D WET MY BLANKY WITHOUT THE RULES!!! You freakin' twats. Anyone laughing at Laura is a traitor to college students everywhere. Ye without sin, seriously. Laura, you attempted to jab the system and thats usually admirable. Nate, you can never smoke pot, drink with minors, cheat on a test, or do anything outside the rules without being a hippocrite, man. C'mon.

If you had held out for just 2 more days, you could've made April 1st!

So the irony in this whole thing, at least for me as a college instructor/prof/etc. is how accurately the abuse/praise Nate is getting mirrors course evaluations. Anonymous people drop by and tell him he's an asshole, tell him he's morally reprehensible, feel like they're holier than thou without doing anything- then some people tell him he's great also without much argument or justification. None of those people posting anonymously had anything on the line or have to account for anything. Now, just imagine that Nate's continued ability to get paid is based on just these comment sections. God. Sometimes I talk myself out of academia and into a 9-5 job so easily.

Now, see, just when we had all that moral ambiguity, theterrible comes around and reminds us of precisely why Nate felt like doing this thing. Thanks, theterrible!

Laura IS the traitor to college students, and if you're actually calling what she did "a jab at the system" like it's a good thing, that just means you're probably one of the people who shouldn't make it through college (or shouldn't have, depending).

There are instances of "breaking the rules" that hurt no-one (such as, arguably, smoking pot). Stealing someone else's work and passing it off as your own is not one of them. As we've covered, repeatedly.

Oh, and it's "hypocrite."

Laura's mother is REASON #1 why she has no ethical system whatsoever. And it's sad but true that parents like Laura's Mommy are a huge percentage of the parents out there; I've seen them time and again stick up for their children who've committed reprehensible acts. I've seen them blame it on other kids, other parents, teachers, anyone else but THEIR child.

1) She tried to cheat on a paper.

2) She promised a substantial sum of money to another person to write said paper for her, with no intention whatsoever of actually paying the fee.

3) When confronted with her transgression by the Dean, instead of owning up and taking the consequences, she further lied and tried to weasel out of it.

4) She cried, lied about having ever done it before, and got her Mommy to plead with Nate to "take it all back".

When I was 3 and my sibling was 5, we each stole a piece of bubblegum from the candy aisle while my mom was shopping at the local grocery store. When we got home, and she saw us chewing gum that she knew we neither had nor had money for, she marched us back to that store and made us each pay the owner personally, in addition to apologizing to them.

It was utter humiliation. Even at that age, I was mortified and devastated.

But you know what? I learned some VERY powerful lessons from that event, which are still with me 40 YEARS LATER.

1) You will get caught.
2) When you get caught, the punishment will be severe.
3) The public humiliation will be even more severe.
4) You will have to look at yourself in the mirror every day after that, knowing what a low form of life you are.

If I'd done this and cried to my Mommy or Daddy, they would have told me that I'd made my bed, and now I would have to lie in it. They might have even cut off my college assistance and told me that I would have work a second job to pay for it all myself if I expected to continue at University.

How many times in her life has Laura's Mommy intervened on her behalf? Probably quite a few, judging by the fact that Laura is obviously a serial liar and cheater. Mommy's aiding-and-abetting has given her the stamp of approval to continue doing so.

I can't believe that people's morals have sunk so low that they don't want to have someone who asked someone to do something dishonest for them actually have to suffer the consequences of their actions. This world is screwed because of fools with this mentality. The sad part is that I think a large portion of this misdirected pity is because the person is a woman, plain and simple.

Ethics should be a mandatory first year class for all colleges. Probably wouldn't be enough to undo the damage already done by our zero-responsibility culture.

'ruined her life'? Only if 'ruin' means 'prevent her from achieving a status that she didn't deserve in the first place'. OK yeah, then I guess Nate 'ruined her life'.

Seriously people, if she gets expelled because of this, then it's because her school considers the fact that she's a cheat and a liar to be beyond the pale. And if she isn't expelled, and merely gets an F on the paper, then you can't seriously say that Nate 'ruined her life'.

In any case, I can't believe the amount of sympathy she's getting, simply because she's a "poor girl". If you want to talk about sexism, there it is, right there for all to see. "Poor cheater and liar girl is still somehow a victim and isn't responsible for the lousy choices she made." Yecch.

hypocrite. Thanks man. But Eric, she didn't "steal" it, she was willing to pay.

Also false, since she received the paper and then had no intention of paying - indeed pretended not to know anything about the deal - long before she knew anything about this website.

Not that it really has any impact on your point, which was completely wrong anyhow, but yes, she did in fact try to steal it.

Dude, no one is laughing at Laura (well, I suppose some people are, but that's pretty lame); and some may be feeling smug or superior, but I'd wager most people "feel her pain" like you might when something embarrassing happens to a character in a movie or on tv. Nevertheless, you can sympathize without having to condone what she did, and go all the way to "hey, she just broke a silly rule!"

This would make quite an interesting study for a moral philosophy class (or maybe an ethics course?). A person's reaction to, and/or [non] sympathy for, the various players' roles and motives probably reveals something or other -- but damned if I know what it is.

I, a good student, shall reread the text. I'm unprepaird for class.

An interesting point, DTB. In Nate's case, for instance, being a member of a family of academics who have been personally harmed by plagiarism - in addition to simply being ethically opposed to it - the sympathy level was something less than zero.

Talk about picking the person with all the wrong attributes to try to scam into writing a paper for you.

DTB2: I don't object to reporting crime; I actually encourage it. If he could have reported her without going to such extreme lengths. Wanting to report dishonesty shouldn't involve acts of dishonesty though. My example was extreme, but it's the same principle looked at in a different sense. Declining and lecturing might (probably) would not have stopped her. Yet it would have been the ethical high ground.

1. She was dumb, and should face what she deserves as said in every other thread about this so far..

2. Nate, if you were so offended, you should have turned her in. Eternally humiliating her through the public internet? Karma will come around full-circle upside your head some time.

Turning her in would have been doing a good service to her (in the long run), Academia to fix the broken system, and society in whole.

That being said, if you saw trouble brewing in the comments of this these threads, you guys could have always closed down the blog til this boiled over.

No, you choose to sit back and watch this explode (waiting for irony..?), watch her and her university get exposed, and then claim that it was out of your control. Man, that's weak.

The fact is, she deserved to be expelled from school for what she did. One should always be prepared for the consequences of one's actions. But that applies to you too. I hope you get what you deserve too (directly or indirectly). Don't forget to blog it for more traffic to your website. ;-)

I agree, it would make an excellent philosophy question, because of the principle. Do you use dishonesty and a form of fraud to stamp out wrong-doing? If it's acceptable here, is it acceptable by police? Where is the line in the sand between civic duty and being a party to wrongful act? How far is acceptable and what type of wrongdoing?

"Declining and lecturing might (probably would) not have stopped her. Yet it would have been the ethical high ground."

See, now, I'm not sure. Is it the ethical high ground to do the safe but probably ineffective thing? Remember, Nate didn't necessarily intend for the dean to actually hear about this - that it went that far is the fault of other people here.

He was *trying* to do something that would negatively impact her in the short term - certainly give her a scare - but teach her a very real lesson that it seems clear she (even now, sadly) hasn't learned.

Don't get me wrong, as I've said elsewhere, he wasn't polite about it. He's a snarky guy. But I'm not sure that taking an active role (however naive, in this case) is ethically worse than sitting back and letting her get away with it on someone else's time.

Bedtime. Adios for now, kids. Maybe, as mentioned before, this'll all be gone by morning, deleted in the interests of simply letting it end. It'd be an interesting closure.

why don't you just turn off the comments?

I only say fraud because what he did was fraud. She certainly never caught on that the paper was not what she bargained for in this situation. I do not feel emotionally against Nate and his actions. We've all done these things. They seem fun or clever at the time, but soon spiral out of our control.

A fine jape, Nate. When I read the original blog entry a few moments ago, I was quite ready to praise you for being a heartless bastard and teaching a harsh lesson to someone who desperately needed it. Now I find myself more impressed by your level of compassion though it seems rather inadequate to solve this dear girl's problems. I do feel rather bad for our Star Pupil, but life is, indeed, rather harsh in its realities. Even should she escape this unscathed, I very much doubt she will find herself inclined toward plagiarism again. I also have no doubt that this will be something of an internet "bogeyman" to be trotted out of a dark closet every time a college student mentions appropriating school work. English major can be a mite vindictive, can we not?

So, let me get this straight. A person who tells the honest truth about what someone did is... wrong for doing so?

Perhaps if the action was so unethical as to be humiliating to be caught doing it, she should not have been doing the act?

Don't do things in shadow if you wouldn't do them in the light, and you're fine. If you're afraid to do the act if you were caught doing it, perhaps you should reevaluate the morality of the act?

Hm. I think that:
a) Nate obviously did the correct thing here. I, myself, will now on give a fully crap-loaded paper to anyone trying to buy my services at the college I attend. Honestly, if he had just told her he wouldn't do it, she would've found someone else. She was too worried about when the paper was due to do it herself. Probably wanted a little sleep, I know that's a battle I fight when I'm doing a late research paper/essay/report.
b) You people are looking into this far too deeply. Nate was simply giving the girl what she deserved. He didn't intend for this to gain this much momentum. He didn't intend to try and make her out as a terrible person. And he certainly isn't one himself for what he did.
c) Everyone is looking for too much punishment here - she's been embarrassed, and is likely not to do it again. If she is kicked out, that's good. Expelled, good. She deserves what she gets, but stop posting ridiculous ideas such as "she deserves hanging/flogging/spanking/being dragged along behind the Pope by a spiked chain" - and no, when you say she should recieve a little mercy for this being her first time - when someone lies, cheats, steals, murders, rapes, or commits any other offense of any sort, it is considered badly the first and every other time. It is still wrongdoing. Meh to you.
d) Stop blasting at each other and at each other's religions and worldviews. Sheez. Be polite, at the very least.
e) Stop accusing Nate of being an executioner, of playing God. Once again, that's simply ridiculous.
f) Don't make me post any more letters. I'm leaving the rest of the alphabet in hopes that you'll just be civil.

Whether it's acceptable for police to use fraud to stamp out wrongdoing is something that has already been decided by the courts and the legislature, so we can say our society has passed on that question. Undercover police (a) dress as hookers to lure unsuspecting, would-be customers into transacting business, (b) pose as drug purchasers to nab drug dealers, (c) pose as children on the internet to nab pedophiles, etc.

You may disagree with this policy, but we already have it, and have had it for some time.

why don't you just turn off the comments?

why don't you just turn off the comments?

Because, if you don't, you are probably creating the basis for a credible case of "malice," despite your disclaimers.

Last thing then I'm off to bed. Looking at things deeply can be a good trait. This is how we learn. There are philosophical questions over other such things, which seem trivial, but serve to make you ponder right and wrong. My position may not be yours, and that's okay too. Everything I post is my opinion.

Somebody said, several hundred comments back,

"I wish university plagerism was the worst problem we had in this world."

Of course he's right; it's the death of orthography that's the worst problem. Go ahead, prove me wrong...

Jenny, I really feel your pain. :( I knew a prof who had amazing ethics, an amazing teaching style, and genuinely wanted her students to learn -- I say "knew" because she's not a prof anymore, it's not entirely accurate because she's still a very good friend of mine. She consistently received substandard evaluations because of completely stupid incidents that came up. For example, she was teaching a statistics course once and brought up the example of ESP as something that can statistically be shown to be random/inaccurate. One student suddenly stood up, screamed "I AM A CHRISTIAN!!! I CANNOT BELIEVE YOU WOULD HAVE US DO AN IN-CLASS ACTIVITY ABOUT ESP :((( I am SO OFFENDED!!" and stormed out of the room.. she didn't even bother to ask if she could be exempt from the activity, she just threw a fit and ran out. Students seem to have such a collective entitlement complex: they're "entitled" to a diploma, they're "entitled" to try their hardest to run pedestrians over because they have a car yet can't bother to leave a few minutes early, they're "entitled" to never be offended by anything.

Oh well.

Undercover police (a) dress as hookers to lure unsuspecting, would-be customers into transacting business, (b) pose as drug purchasers to nab drug dealers, (c) pose as children on the internet to nab pedophiles, etc.

True, but where's the line. Did actually writing the paper cross that line? If a female cop posed as a hooker, had sex with the person (but let's say to parallel this it was really bad sex), and then busted the guy, is that acceptable? That's where the line is drawn to me and he went just subtly over that line.

Most laws (all laws?) and their application boil down to an exercise in line-drawing. Even murder has mitigating factors (self-defense, "heat of the moment" -- I can't remember the technical term for that).

No, actually, the correct comparison would be the police putting fake money into a briefcase used to buy drugs, marked to easily catch the criminals.

But, apparently, the cops are the bad people, because they bought drugs. Oh, the poor dealers. Boo-freakin'-hoo.

I love the analogy...Nate's a cop, he gave funny money, and never recieved his drugs. =) Busted the criminal, and is a criminal for doing it.

I think this whole damn thing is funny. And both parties are losers. Laura K. has her life ruined, which is OK because that's what should happen to cheaters and idiots. She knew it was wrong to do this, but did it anyway, so I have no sympathy for her.

And then there's Nate, who had his 15 minutes of fame and now has a reputation as being something of a thug who uses the exploitation of others to pimp his own site.

Ideally Laura is thrown out of school, and Nate's site soon is consigned to the dustbins of history. And we all move on, looking for the next silly 'net event.

Thanks for watching.

You know guys...defending Laura isn't going to get you into her pants.

BURN HER ANYWAYYYYY!!!!

SHE'S A WITCH!!! WIIIIIITCCHHH!!!

I saw goodie Laura reciting the lords prayer backwards!!! She's spaketh in tongues!!!

hello?

IF ONE MORE PERSON writes about "karma" I am going to pop a gasket. The same people who believe in karma feel no guilt about stealing something because petting their dog "balances out the forces."

Our civilization is in decline. My fear now is that Laura, registered republican in five years, married to Joe Sixpack, starts whelping puppies like they're going out of style and this unpromising genetic pool is continued for another generation.

thank you Karma, our registered eugenicist (just messin' friend!)

I honestly don't understand all the bleeding heart commentary that tries to excuse Laura's plagiarism...it is intellectual THEFT. Theft is bad. Thou shalt not steal. A very basic, simple idea. Do not claim that someone else's hard work and ideas are your own.

There were a number of less-than-intelligent mistakes made here. The first was Laura not being personally responsible enough to plan ahead and set aside enough time to do her own research and write her own paper. Then, instead of going to her professor OR knuckling down and doing her own work, she decided to throw money at the problem and cheat. Then she failed to even look around long enough to find a reputable (sorry, Nate!) essay writing service (which would still be dishonest, but she wouldn't be able to get product without prior payment). Then she failed to even READ the essay Nate wrote before handing it in as her own work. Then she tried to weasel out of paying for services rendered. Then she lied about her identity. And on and on.

The bottom line is that she was caught red-handed and in the wrong. Her punishment is not and was not meted out by Nate, it is and will be decided upon by her university. They no doubt have either an honor code or a standard disclaimer that all students are made aware of that states that students should not turn in work they did not do all by themselves in exchange for a grade or credit.

Students who do struggle and sweat over their own assignments are being done a disservice when lazy, dishonest students choose to steal, cheat and then lie. Let's say you spend five days writing, researching, revising, proofreading and then typing (or, if allowed at your school, paying someone to TYPE, not WRITE) your paper. Then someone else throws money at the problem because they spent five days doing everything BUT writing, researching, etc., and they buy a paper and make an A. You get a C. You did the actual work, the cheater did not. If they aren't caught, is that fair? Is that A earned? If the class is graded on a curve, do they deserve to get a better final grade than you? No, no and no.

On an unrelated note, we as a whole are getting overly lax about enforcing literacy. Elementary school students should know the difference between "their" and "they're", "flare" and "flair", "pique", "peek" and "peak", "you're" and "your" and so on. High school students should have mastered spelling (or spellcheck), subject-verb agreement, and how to write a simple paper that begins with an introductory paragraph, some supporting paragraphs that correspond to single thoughts or points each, and then a concluding paragraph that wraps everything up in a logical fashion. And college students who cannot write a five page, double-spaced, paper in one night are to be pitied, but cheating is not to be condoned. There are TA's and writing center helpers and librarians and professors and classmates who will be willing to sit down with a student who struggles with composition and give them pointers (WITHOUT doing their work FOR them).

Writing coherently is also a skill that people need in most business-related jobs. Not only is Laura hurting other students with her dishonesty, she is also cheating herself. She is wasting her money if she takes a course she does no actual work for and she is shooting herself in the foot if she fails to learn a basic and valuable skill before graduating (if that's still possible) and job-hunting. It is hard enough to get a waitress job in a crappy economy. If you do manage to snag an office job or management or professional position somewhere, the inability to function on a basic literate level when writing briefs, outlines, presentations, business letters, and so on will not endear her to a future boss.

Lastly, if she had not done several unethical (and unwise) things before Nate got involved, the whole situation would never have happened. SHE chose to be lazy (one will assume, as the paper wasn't even BEGUN the day before it was due), she chose to contact a total stranger to help her cheat, she promised payment with (it is now obvious) no plans to actually follow through, she turned in Nate's work as her own without bothering to even read it, and as a result of all those actions, she hung herself. Whether or not Nate posted anything about it online, she still hung herself when she handed that paper in as her own work. If she didn't get an F for plagiarism, she certainly would get an F for the mismash of bogosity that Nate wrote...such bogosity being obvious within a nanosecond to any literate creature with an IQ superior to that of your average zucchini IF they bothered to even LOOK at it.

The penalty for cheating / plagiarism is spelled out clearly at every legitimate, accredited college and university. When Laura CHOSE to risk being caught, she set herself up for the sternest penalty her school can give. SHE chose to run that risk. Nate didn't cause her problem(s), she did. And did she learn anything? Like others have said, either she will get smarter about not getting caught (though, if she is not expelled, you can bet her work will be examined with a fine-toothed comb from her on out, and I doubt even a careless paraphrase without attribution will be allowed to slip through again), or she will (one hopes) let shame motivate her to do right from here on out.

Shame is your conscience's way of letting you know you DID fuck up. If she has a conscience, she will learn if only to avoid feeling shame again. The scorn of her peers (and total strangers around the world on the Internet) may also make an impact.

A hard lesson, but one an adult in college (a third year student is presumably older than 18, hence an adult) should damn well know better than to cheat, lie and steal. Just because Enron and Michael Millken did it in the business world does not make it good, or socially acceptable, behavior.

If you don't fuck up when said fuck-up is easily avoided, then you don't ever suffer the consequences of your mistake. No one forced her to make the wrong decision (repeatedly). I have no sympathy at this point. Laura had the opportunity to own up several times and chose to lie repeatedly, then she got her mommie involved in an attempt to shame Nate because he exposed HER bad behavior in the first place. I'm just appalled.

Also, since you agreed, Nate, most kindly, to try and remove as many instances of her name on your personal site as possible, then you need to do a search for "Po**" and "P-a-*-*" and "L-e-w-*-*", as those still show, as do your HTML links. Just FYI. I knew the girl's real name and real university within two seconds. I don't think I needed to know either fact in order to get the gist of the situation. The folks whinging about how Nate "ruined" this girl's life are seriously out of touch with reality, as has been pointed out. SHE approached HIM, a total stranger, and SHE made every wrong choice along the way. Actions have consequences, and I can feel empathy for Laura for getting herself in a big mess, but I feel zero sympathy, since she screwed herself by making so many incredibly stupid choices. I think of the kids who work three jobs and eat ramen and do without every luxury just to go to school and THEY do their work. I think of the professors who have to waste their time with cheaters instead of focusing