Wouldn't this be mouth-watering news for the lawyers of the students involved in the plagiarism case - come on, they will have lawyers...?
Copy of letter to repec plagiarism committee and editors of AER and JPE
-
Shleifer (no "c" in his last name, morons) did lose his professorial chair as a result of all the hullabaloo over him, but otherwise was not punished. He does have the highest h-index of any living economist, according to RePEc, which so many of you worship, although how that came to be could be questioned, and may be a bigger scandal than some of these other matters.
-
Oh, and Larry Summers lost his Harvard presidency as a result of his covering up for Shleifer, although he got to be top economic adviser to the prez for awhile afterwards anyway, not to mention getting a positive play in that Zuckerberg movie, putting down those silly twins.
-
Response by CZ of REPEC
"Thank you for your submission and sorry for the time it took to respond to you.
The reason for the delay is that this was the first time we got an
anonymous submission and several committee members expressed concern about this. We agreed that we would not take anonymous submissions, but you can make the submission to one committee member who can then keep your
identity hidden from the other committee members. We have amended our
procedures in this regard on the website.We will thus not treat your submission, not because of lack of merit, but because of your anonymity. You are welcome to resubmit non-anonymously to any committe member while requesting anonymity, but I would suggest to first see whether the journals you contacted react.
Sincerely,"
AER and JPE were contacted bu did not reply
-
Well, I guess those "several committee members" will have names, right? I mean, they clearly don't want anonymous claims, so why have anonymous rejections to anonymous submissions?
Since it's OK to contact individual members, maybe "several committee members" could receive several re-submissions. Non-anonymous or otherwise.Response by CZ of REPEC
"Thank you for your submission and sorry for the time it took to respond to you.
The reason for the delay is that this was the first time we got an
anonymous submission and several committee members expressed concern about this. We agreed that we would not take anonymous submissions, but you can make the submission to one committee member who can then keep your
identity hidden from the other committee members. We have amended our
procedures in this regard on the website.
We will thus not treat your submission, not because of lack of merit, but because of your anonymity. You are welcome to resubmit non-anonymously to any committe member while requesting anonymity, but I would suggest to first see whether the journals you contacted react.
Sincerely,"
AER and JPE were contacted bu did not reply -
posted to repec plagiarism blog:
http://blog.repec.org/2011/02/16/plagiarism-in-economics
("awaiting moderation")"I read a complaint was filed that was regarded important by the committee but it was rejected because it was filed anonymously: http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/copy-of-letter-to-repec-plagiarism-committee-and-editors-of-aer-and-jpe
The whole thing has been out for quite a while and is well documented in the wiki http://freyplag.wikia.com with evidence on numerous cases published in dozens of journals, involving 20 authors. What does it say about our discipline if nobody dares to come forward and submit this non-anonymously and no action is taken?"Asked Prof. Debora Weber-Wulff in her blog if she'd be willing to submit the case (awaiting moderation there, too)
http://copy-shake-paste.blogspot.de/search/label/self-plagiarism -
Kirk is anonymous, so is economic logician - our who do you mean with EL? So no option. Noah is a grad student, should not bother him. I think that non-econ plagiarism expert Wulff-Weber is a good choice. If she doesn't take it up we will find someone else. Does anyone know if Storbeck leaving Handelsblatt had anything to do with the case?
-
You know, there is one solution to this, submit it to the general press. After the R&R debacle and the lack of current news beyond the NSA thing, I'm sure some outlets would love to run these titles:
Economics committee with prof x, y and z turn blind eye to plagirism
Prof x defends [some unpopular measure] but also defends academic dishonesty
etc etc etc
R&R has put a bad light on us that can and should be exploited for good purposes.