Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
dilligaf

Cut & paste

Recommended Posts

It's really simple... plagiarism and breaching copyright...sacked...that's the only option.

That's it. Go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Albert Tatlock said:

It's really simple... plagiarism and breaching copyright...sacked...that's the only option.

That's it. Go.

Although I realise that you are probably 100 years older than me Bert (based on your avatar), can I help you to understand that you are wrong?

Look here at our government website - https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Of course it doesn't matter.

We still got paid. And are still getting paid.

For not having an original thought in our heads.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Of course it doesn't matter.

We still got paid. And are still getting paid.

For not having an original thought in our heads.

Exactly. The Vision is someone else's vision not Michaela Morris'.

Why are we paying vast amounts of money for someone not to do their job?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Exactly. The Vision is someone else's vision not Michaela Morris'.

Why are we paying vast amounts of money for someone not to do their job?

It could be argued that by not wasting lots of time creating an original Vision document Ms. Morris has been able to focus more on the day to day components of her job, hopefully trying to improve services and reduce costs. (Once can dream)

Still wouldn't excuse the rank dishonesty of passing off the document as being largely her own work. That's the biggest fault here, claiming authorship was simply dishonest, fraudulent, gross misconduct, needs sacking.

As I said in an earlier post the re-use of best practice developed elsewhere is entirely justifiable, even if I hate the way our politicians and civil servants keep copying UK laws and practices. If I'd wanted to live in the UK I'd have stayed there and I don't want these Gov't halfwits turning the IoM into a mini-UK. I don't see them copying Ireland much (and I'd really like to see them copy the Irish approach to public sector payroll reductions).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, craggy_steve said:

...the rank dishonesty of passing off the document as being largely her own work. That's the biggest fault here, claiming authorship was simply dishonest, fraudulent, gross misconduct, needs sacking.

That’s it in a nutshell - well said. Ashford’s craven comments on IOMN website this morning are a crushing indictment of his ineptitude too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of UK laws and practices are at least established and proven. If not based on best practice. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Two problems. The first lies in taking these established setups and then butchering them to suit our "local circumstances and needs". Which occasionally leaves the result as unworkable.

The second is the number of legislature and salaried people required to carry out all this adapting and butchery for a population of 83k.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, craggy_steve said:

I don't see them copying Ireland much (and I'd really like to see them copy the Irish approach to public sector payroll reductions).

In that I agree 100%, Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

A lot of UK laws and practices are at least established and proven. If not based on best practice. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Two problems. The first lies in taking these established setups and then butchering them to suit our "local circumstances and needs". Which occasionally leaves the result as unworkable.

The second is the number of legislature and salaried people required to carry out all this adapting and butchery for a population of 83k.

Some of them are proven not to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and I'd wish they's stfu saying stuff about reinventing the wheel.  Another use of a cliche to cover stuff up. We're talking about a heath service here. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, craggy_steve said:

It could be argued that by not wasting lots of time creating an original Vision document Ms. Morris has been able to focus more on the day to day components of her job, hopefully trying to improve services and reduce costs. (Once can dream)

Still wouldn't excuse the rank dishonesty of passing off the document as being largely her own work. That's the biggest fault here, claiming authorship was simply dishonest, fraudulent, gross misconduct, needs sacking.

As I said in an earlier post the re-use of best practice developed elsewhere is entirely justifiable, even if I hate the way our politicians and civil servants keep copying UK laws and practices.

In a sense it''s even worse than plagiarism.  Because if they were really concerned about finding out the best practice they would be looking at a number of different places and picking out what worked best and could be most suitably adapted to the Island.  They wouldn't just confine their search to England or indeed the British Isles.  And they would be open about where their ideas were taken from so that others could assess how well they worked in situ.  The excuse that they are saving time and effort doesn't convince if they're not open about the process.

But of course this all has little to do with the reason the document was actually produced, which had nothing to with providing the best and most suitable healthcare system for the people of the Island.  It's purpose was simply to try to prove that the 'author' was doing something when they weren't.  Hence the declaration that it was just a 'vision' - a vague declaration of intent without the need to do anything or to think things through to see if they would work.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

In a sense it''s even worse than plagiarism.  Because if they were really concerned about finding out the best practice they would be looking at a number of different places and picking out what worked best and could be most suitably adapted to the Island.  They wouldn't just confine their search to England or indeed the British Isles.  And they would be open about where their ideas were taken from so that others could assess how well they worked in situ.  The excuse that they are saving time and effort doesn't convince if they're not open about the process.

But of course this all has little to do with the reason the document was actually produced, which had nothing to with providing the best and most suitable healthcare system for the people of the Island.  It's purpose was simply to try to prove that the 'author' was doing something when they weren't.  Hence the declaration that it was just a 'vision' - a vague declaration of intent without the need to do anything or to think things through to see if they would work.

Indeed. It's amazing how many in public service don't know the difference between a vision and a strategy,

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2019 at 8:38 PM, P.K. said:

But essentially leaders pick themselves.

Isn't that the problem though? We have a house full of people who've picked themselves as leaders, and the we've given them the votes to prove it?

I wonder how many people will question Mr Ashford on the issue of flagrant plagiarism and gross misconduct he is attempting to excuse when he comes knocking for a vote next time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been a tendency in the CS to promote more and more people to senior positions who hold accountancy qualifications and have prior experience in accounting. I was once told that an accountant is someone who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing. That is not exclusively true, in my experience, but it is important to be able to see further than a spreadsheet to achieve anything. The Chief Secretary  is an accountant with no leadership ability whatsoever. A glaring omission on the CV of someone who is supposed to be leading the Civil Service. Civil Service promotions to senior positions are rarely made on the basis of leadership ability. A few years ago the CS created a Corporate Leadership Group, consisting of the most senior grades in the Service, many of whom received large salary increases on the basis of an "assessment" of their roles, on the back of the creation of this Group. However, there was no greater emphasis on Leading, no additional Leadership training, no new criteria assessing Leadership ability or achievement when promoting and no evidence of any actual leadership within Cabinet Office or Departments. Its hardly surprising that you can get away with copying someone else's work, pass it off as your own whilst continuing to collect a large salary, with the support of your bosses. Imposing and creating values is not easy and requires drive and leadership. Neither exists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×