April 24, 2010 at 12:39 pm
WayneS (4/24/2010)
Jeff, I agree that it is implicitly covered. However, I agree with Lynn that it needs to be explicitly stated. Perhaps as I amended above?
Cool... let's add a thousand other things like "Thou shalt not steal from they employer" and "Though shalt not lie on thy time card" and "Thou shalt actually work at home when working from home" and "Thou shalt not fondle thy fellow worker", etc, etc, etc.
Do you want a code of ethics or a library of laws?
Let's not make this complicated.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 26, 2010 at 7:13 am
Jeff Moden (4/24/2010)
WayneS (4/24/2010)
Jeff, I agree that it is implicitly covered. However, I agree with Lynn that it needs to be explicitly stated. Perhaps as I amended above?Cool... let's add a thousand other things like "Thou shalt not steal from they employer" and "Though shalt not lie on thy time card" and "Thou shalt actually work at home when working from home" and "Thou shalt not fondle thy fellow worker", etc, etc, etc.
Do you want a code of ethics or a library of laws?
Let's not make this complicated.
It isn't complicated. I just felt after the latest issues regarding plagiarism that this is one area that needed to be explicitly declared so that there would be no ambiquity should it have to be invoked.
April 26, 2010 at 7:25 am
Lynn Pettis (4/26/2010)
Jeff Moden (4/24/2010)
WayneS (4/24/2010)
Jeff, I agree that it is implicitly covered. However, I agree with Lynn that it needs to be explicitly stated. Perhaps as I amended above?Cool... let's add a thousand other things like "Thou shalt not steal from they employer" and "Though shalt not lie on thy time card" and "Thou shalt actually work at home when working from home" and "Thou shalt not fondle thy fellow worker", etc, etc, etc.
Do you want a code of ethics or a library of laws?
Let's not make this complicated.
It isn't complicated. I just felt after the latest issues regarding plagiarism that this is one area that needed to be explicitly declared so that there would be no ambiquity should it have to be invoked.
I'm not sure I'm sold one way or the other on this. I like the simplicity of Jeff's Oath/Pledge and I believe that it could be applied to this situation. However, I know that somewhere along the lines some sort of NDA for the tests themselves will need to be added. If an NDA is not explicitly stated people will choose to abuse it, and we'll be in the same mess with brain dumps that MS is. Look at how many people come here just to get answers to interview questions...
I would see this as separate from the a Code of Ethics and would need to be agreed to by people taking the tests/going in front of the review boards... I would imagine that might end up being more like a library of laws and could be a place where this type of rule could be added. Additionally, I would favor any language that allows such code of ethics/NDA etc to be amended with an eye toward the future.
-Luke.
April 26, 2010 at 8:41 am
Jeff Moden (4/23/2010)
[font="Arial Black"]2. I will protect and guard the privacy of individuals’ data and work(s) in their best interests and keep such interests and data secret provided such interests are moral, ethical, do not interfere with the privacy of other individuals, are not contrary to existing laws, and are not contrary to the sanctity and preservation of the data as stated in the first pledge above.
I am trying to read this from both sides of the fence and find loopholes.
Does the word work mean that you will do what's in their best interest?
or
Does it mean the functions performed by an individual?
I can read it both ways. If the latter then I would add the (s), and leave it alone as far as the plagiarism. If not, then I think a modification would need to be made. I do not think that an explicit statement on plagiarism need to be made. That can be included in an NDA or something else - where more verbiage is conducive. In a code of conduct / ethics statement we would be fine with something broad.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 26, 2010 at 8:44 am
Do we have a sharepoint site? I can see this thread fragmenting into multiple ones quickly.
April 26, 2010 at 8:46 am
I'm open either way, as long as it is addressed somewhere. A good place to do that may be a FAQ that could expand on the code and provide more concise interpretation.
April 29, 2010 at 7:16 am
Since you have talked about plagerism being grounds for revoking someone's certificate, I think it should be explicitly mentioned so no one can come back with a "But you didn't tell me that!" and make an unpleasant legal case about the certificate being revoked and therefore robbing him of the livelihood represented by the certificate.
-- Kit
April 29, 2010 at 7:25 am
I agree with you morally, but once you start to get into policing ethics and morals, you are potentially opening yourself up to some legal actions. I can't imagine someone suing PASS or an organization over the revocation of certification, but stranger things have happened.
I would put it in there, but I would be careful about using it lightly. You might include a more general, "follow our code of conduct" and include some good general qualities in there so you have a little leeway
April 29, 2010 at 7:41 am
I went back and looked at the wording in Jeff's draft. The issue there is that many of us borrow code for others and use it. That could be seen as an issue here. I think in terms of defining this, you might need to more explicitly use something along the lines of giving credit and having permission.
April 29, 2010 at 7:42 am
Do we have a Sharepoint site we like?
April 29, 2010 at 7:53 am
Steve Jones - Editor (4/29/2010)
Do we have a Sharepoint site we like?
Not yet. I think we all have gotten a bit busy with other things and gotten a little distracted. Need to get this back in to focus.
Being at work, I can't really check the ones we found and provide my suggestion for the one I think we should choose. Have a soccer game this evening at 5:00 PM MDT, so I won't be home until around 7:00 PM MDT.
April 29, 2010 at 9:55 am
Steve Jones - Editor (4/29/2010)
I went back and looked at the wording in Jeff's draft. The issue there is that many of us borrow code for others and use it. That could be seen as an issue here. I think in terms of defining this, you might need to more explicitly use something along the lines of giving credit and having permission.
There are many nuances with code making it difficult to police any plagiarism in that regard. One of the issues being that it is quite possible for two people to write the same piece of code but have no connection between the two, or to never have seen one another's code (in terms of SQL, and with relative possibility with other compiled languages). When dealing with code, we would need to pursue cautiously.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 29, 2010 at 11:33 am
CirquedeSQLeil (4/29/2010)
Steve Jones - Editor (4/29/2010)
I went back and looked at the wording in Jeff's draft. The issue there is that many of us borrow code for others and use it. That could be seen as an issue here. I think in terms of defining this, you might need to more explicitly use something along the lines of giving credit and having permission.There are many nuances with code making it difficult to police any plagiarism in that regard. One of the issues being that it is quite possible for two people to write the same piece of code but have no connection between the two, or to never have seen one another's code (in terms of SQL, and with relative possibility with other compiled languages). When dealing with code, we would need to pursue cautiously.
I think, in regards to plagiarism, our concern is more on the publication of articles, presentations, etc, that builds one's reputation rather than the use of code (not to diminish that as well). In this regard, it would be easier to police as has been demonstrated by some of the discussions recently when such plagiarism has been discovered.
April 29, 2010 at 11:39 am
Lynn Pettis (4/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (4/29/2010)
Steve Jones - Editor (4/29/2010)
I went back and looked at the wording in Jeff's draft. The issue there is that many of us borrow code for others and use it. That could be seen as an issue here. I think in terms of defining this, you might need to more explicitly use something along the lines of giving credit and having permission.There are many nuances with code making it difficult to police any plagiarism in that regard. One of the issues being that it is quite possible for two people to write the same piece of code but have no connection between the two, or to never have seen one another's code (in terms of SQL, and with relative possibility with other compiled languages). When dealing with code, we would need to pursue cautiously.
I think, in regards to plagiarism, our concern is more on the publication of articles, presentations, etc, that builds one's reputation rather than the use of code (not to diminish that as well). In this regard, it would be easier to police as has been demonstrated by some of the discussions recently when such plagiarism has been discovered.
I would take it a step further, we would be concerned with plagiarism of code if that code is used to build reputation through the publication of articles - it would have to be fairly obvious though. Beyond that, let's leave scripts and code out of it.
Besides, if one does nothing but copy code, I think that would be hashed out through the examination process and/or lab (hopefully).
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 29, 2010 at 12:04 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (4/29/2010)
Lynn Pettis (4/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (4/29/2010)
Steve Jones - Editor (4/29/2010)
I went back and looked at the wording in Jeff's draft. The issue there is that many of us borrow code for others and use it. That could be seen as an issue here. I think in terms of defining this, you might need to more explicitly use something along the lines of giving credit and having permission.There are many nuances with code making it difficult to police any plagiarism in that regard. One of the issues being that it is quite possible for two people to write the same piece of code but have no connection between the two, or to never have seen one another's code (in terms of SQL, and with relative possibility with other compiled languages). When dealing with code, we would need to pursue cautiously.
I think, in regards to plagiarism, our concern is more on the publication of articles, presentations, etc, that builds one's reputation rather than the use of code (not to diminish that as well). In this regard, it would be easier to police as has been demonstrated by some of the discussions recently when such plagiarism has been discovered.
I would take it a step further, we would be concerned with plagiarism of code if that code is used to build reputation through the publication of articles - it would have to be fairly obvious though. Beyond that, let's leave scripts and code out of it.
Besides, if one does nothing but copy code, I think that would be hashed out through the examination process and/or lab (hopefully).
I agree, I guess I wasn't clear enough when I mentioned code. I was talking about copying of code as many of us have probably done here on SSC when people have provided useful code that we incorporate in our daily work. We may not always remember to comment the code with who provided it to us. Plus, considering some people change thier screen names on a regular basis, attributing the code to '.' may not mean anything unless you happen to know who that is from association here on SSC.
Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 312 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply