If what you are saying is true, you had best take it up with Christopher F. Rufo himself, not with me. I am extremely careful about attribution, and your anonymity as an academic expert posting on Substack forums does not help you establish authorship. Putting your name on what you write, does.
If what you are saying is true, you had best take it up with Christopher F. Rufo himself, not with me. I am extremely careful about attribution, and your anonymity as an academic expert posting on Substack forums does not help you establish authorship. Putting your name on what you write, does.
Stop telling me what I "should" be doing, Linda. Do not dictate to me my business. It is my choice whether I use a full name or not. I did not expect readers to misunderstand who writes the various posts here, since there is always a name or indication at the top of each post. Very few of the posts say "Christopher F. Rufo" at the top; he writes only the leading article, by and large. Hence, most posts are NOT written by him. You sound a bit totalitarian yourself here, in using that excuse.
YOU are the one mistaking and mis-attributing my material. Not Chris Rufo. I am not sure how you can be using this Substack forum to comment, but saying you do not know how it works.
Why would you think that a post labelled with "A" as the name was written by Chris Rufo? How did you come to that conclusion? I know the field far better and longer than Chris.....and I was kindly helping out. I thought that was obvious. I mention it every now and again, too.
I know all about establishing authorship. It is a world I am very familiar with. You need to understand the idea of generosity. Which is the value I was demonstrating here. I did establish authorship with "A" at the beginning of my posts. How did you miss that, Linda? There was no "Christopher F. Rufo" on my posts.
For someone who claims she is motivated by spreading the truth....I would question whether that is actually the case. You might have apologized to me. Instead, you lashed out. Not a very truthful or humanitarian response.
Interacting on a Substack blog is very new to me, this is the first time I have ever interacted in this way. I apologize for mistaking your A as belonging to Christopher Rufo, and thank you for your explanation. I am very sorry you misunderstood my intention. I am a writer and political analyst who reads voraciously and only quotes cited sources––never anonymous sources. I was trying to make the point that if your anonymous work is being used by others, in this case Christopher F. Rufo, it is a matter between you and him. I am not trying to tell you how to live your life or dictating to you your business, far from it. I was only suggesting how to solve your anonymity problem that has resulted in your own words, as your original material being attributed to others.
Stop boasting of being a "political analyst", Linda. When your description on the Substack bio says you ran a small retail clothing business all of your working life. And that you are filling time now in retirement. Nothing wrong with that, except when you try to pass yourself off as someone with a Ph.D. and high political analysis positions for years.
Your good intentions are obvious to anyone without a colossal ego like Anonymous A here, and I hope you'll ignore his weird idea that his (again, anonymous) comments on a public forum are private property.
Miaow. More than a bit catty, wasn't it? Envy eating you, my friend?
So...a well educated professional who knows their subject is simply someone with a colossal ego? That is not at all an intelligent thing to say, Bull Hubbard. Quite the opposite.
How about Christ Rufo? Colossal ego? He has a lower level of education than I do, actually, and little field experience in the subject. Or personal experience. What makes the difference between Chris Rufo, and myself? The fact that he published his co-written book as a requirement of keeping his position with a Think Tank? Does that dissolve his otherwise "colossal ego"? How do you know I haven't published?
Does the fact that I do this freely -- no pay -- and that Chris makes $$ out of it indicate that I am doing it for ego and Chris is not? Again, quite the opposite, I would think.
Does everyone who can think original and well-tutored thoughts and write them clearly, thereby have a colossal ego, Bull? You have read and commented on many of my substack posts over months; why would you do so if you see things this way?
What exactly are the terms here in your silly insults, Bull Hubbard? I think you are envious, actually. Of me.
I recommend that you put on a thinking cap before you are tempted to spout trash.
Well, Bull Hubbard, you traitor. I have corresponded with you pleasantly and at length over many comment forums. You have complimented my work. And now, you turn into a back-stabber? What came over you?
Take it easy . . . nothing personal . . . I just don't understand why you are so possessive of your public comments. Please forgive my hasty judgment of your ego. I think politically we are on the same page, and I would hate to alienate anyone like that, even someone I don't know personally.
Is Chris Rufo possessive of his public comments? You bet he is. And he would have a good Intellectual Property lawyer onto anyone mis-using his work in their own publication, as Linda G, said she intended to do with mine.
Chris Rufo is the self-claimed plagiarism warrior. And then he gets caught as party to plagiarism himself?
Smarten up, Bull! You are making very naive comments over this situation. As if you are not a grown-up, are not educated, and do not know how the modern world works.
If you want to play in even the middle leagues, Linda, do your homework. Learn how to use basic sources. I learned the first week of my undergrad years.
And do not plagiarize. Chris Rufo has partially built his reputation on going after plagiarists. You seem unaware of that fact, too.
Thank you for your apology, but then you go on to blame me anyway. Back-handed apology.
It was not me doing the mis-understanding. That was you. I have never before encountered anyone else on these Substack forums who mistakes my work for that of Chris Rufo. Or the work of anyone but myself.
It is NOT Chris Rufo who is using my work. It is you! He has nothing to do with your mistake. Although Chris will indeed benefit by being given credit for my work. You claim you are including it in your next self-published book, and attributing it to Chris Rufo. He has nothing to do with your actions here.
Every time you respond on this issue, you try to find a new way to put the blame on me. This time, you claim I have an anonymity problem. Where have you been these past 20 years, Linda? You have not picked up that Cancel Culture is a danger? And so many websites and cybersecurity experts recommend pseudonyms?
You are the one who continues to claim in your comments that you love and agree with the work you are reading, and that you believe it is Rufo's work. You do this when you are obviously replying to me and my posts. How can you mistake that? A "political analyst" knows the basic rules of plagiarism and attribution, Linda. Not to mention how to use comment forums. If you don't know how to use these forums, stop lifting material from them and attributing it to the wrong person.
I will try once more––I was always and only referring to Christopher F. Rufo’s work that I have personally read over the last two years. My mistake was thinking that in this instance I was "talking" to Christopher F. Rufo when I was actually "talking" to YOU. I am not blaming you. I have apologized for my error, and have never read a single word that you have written outside of these comments in the last two days. Lifting material? Attributing it to the wrong person? Surely you are joking. My book has already been published, and you are not in it!
You still don't get it, BH, do you? You are still attempting to look as if you have the upper hand. You cannot admit your mistakes and belligerent behaviour because of them. Although it is all very clear in these posts.
Some people make denial a way of life. You have to keep up your ruse now because otherwise you look pretty stewpid. Well....we can all see that anyway,
Well, I tried to cool it, but I suppose now I have to tussle since you annoyed me by being a horse's ass. Before I begin ignoring your bizarre comments, I want to say I think you're a paranoid nut who takes these discussions far too seriously and who apparently believes his comments on a Substack reader's forum are interesting enough to justify telling someone not to quote him. And you have the crust to assume you speak for other anonymous subscribers. "We"? OK A-hole.
You call yourself a political analyst, Linda, but you have no idea how to use the basic information sources such as Substack and the comment boards?
Hm-m-m.
I see you begin your comment here by treating me a a stupid child, as in, "I will try once more." That placed the supposed credibility in your court, you believe. Positioning the other person as the dummie from the start.
You stated very openly in a comment of yours that you were lifting material here from my posts, and attributing it in your self-publishing to Chris Rufo. You seemed to be proud of knowing enough to attribute material. Trouble was....you intend to attribute to the wrong person.
There is nothing stopping anyone from self-publishing never-ending material. There is no limit. That excuse of having finished your book does not hold water. And digital versions can be changed regularly.
Why did you boast, then, of using my material under Chris Rufo's name? If you intend to self-publish no more?
If what you are saying is true, you had best take it up with Christopher F. Rufo himself, not with me. I am extremely careful about attribution, and your anonymity as an academic expert posting on Substack forums does not help you establish authorship. Putting your name on what you write, does.
Stop telling me what I "should" be doing, Linda. Do not dictate to me my business. It is my choice whether I use a full name or not. I did not expect readers to misunderstand who writes the various posts here, since there is always a name or indication at the top of each post. Very few of the posts say "Christopher F. Rufo" at the top; he writes only the leading article, by and large. Hence, most posts are NOT written by him. You sound a bit totalitarian yourself here, in using that excuse.
YOU are the one mistaking and mis-attributing my material. Not Chris Rufo. I am not sure how you can be using this Substack forum to comment, but saying you do not know how it works.
Why would you think that a post labelled with "A" as the name was written by Chris Rufo? How did you come to that conclusion? I know the field far better and longer than Chris.....and I was kindly helping out. I thought that was obvious. I mention it every now and again, too.
I know all about establishing authorship. It is a world I am very familiar with. You need to understand the idea of generosity. Which is the value I was demonstrating here. I did establish authorship with "A" at the beginning of my posts. How did you miss that, Linda? There was no "Christopher F. Rufo" on my posts.
For someone who claims she is motivated by spreading the truth....I would question whether that is actually the case. You might have apologized to me. Instead, you lashed out. Not a very truthful or humanitarian response.
Interacting on a Substack blog is very new to me, this is the first time I have ever interacted in this way. I apologize for mistaking your A as belonging to Christopher Rufo, and thank you for your explanation. I am very sorry you misunderstood my intention. I am a writer and political analyst who reads voraciously and only quotes cited sources––never anonymous sources. I was trying to make the point that if your anonymous work is being used by others, in this case Christopher F. Rufo, it is a matter between you and him. I am not trying to tell you how to live your life or dictating to you your business, far from it. I was only suggesting how to solve your anonymity problem that has resulted in your own words, as your original material being attributed to others.
Stop boasting of being a "political analyst", Linda. When your description on the Substack bio says you ran a small retail clothing business all of your working life. And that you are filling time now in retirement. Nothing wrong with that, except when you try to pass yourself off as someone with a Ph.D. and high political analysis positions for years.
Your good intentions are obvious to anyone without a colossal ego like Anonymous A here, and I hope you'll ignore his weird idea that his (again, anonymous) comments on a public forum are private property.
Hello Mr. Colossal Ego, Bull Hubbard:
Miaow. More than a bit catty, wasn't it? Envy eating you, my friend?
So...a well educated professional who knows their subject is simply someone with a colossal ego? That is not at all an intelligent thing to say, Bull Hubbard. Quite the opposite.
How about Christ Rufo? Colossal ego? He has a lower level of education than I do, actually, and little field experience in the subject. Or personal experience. What makes the difference between Chris Rufo, and myself? The fact that he published his co-written book as a requirement of keeping his position with a Think Tank? Does that dissolve his otherwise "colossal ego"? How do you know I haven't published?
Does the fact that I do this freely -- no pay -- and that Chris makes $$ out of it indicate that I am doing it for ego and Chris is not? Again, quite the opposite, I would think.
Does everyone who can think original and well-tutored thoughts and write them clearly, thereby have a colossal ego, Bull? You have read and commented on many of my substack posts over months; why would you do so if you see things this way?
What exactly are the terms here in your silly insults, Bull Hubbard? I think you are envious, actually. Of me.
I recommend that you put on a thinking cap before you are tempted to spout trash.
Well, Bull Hubbard, you traitor. I have corresponded with you pleasantly and at length over many comment forums. You have complimented my work. And now, you turn into a back-stabber? What came over you?
Goes to show that they walk amongst us.
Take it easy . . . nothing personal . . . I just don't understand why you are so possessive of your public comments. Please forgive my hasty judgment of your ego. I think politically we are on the same page, and I would hate to alienate anyone like that, even someone I don't know personally.
Is Chris Rufo possessive of his public comments? You bet he is. And he would have a good Intellectual Property lawyer onto anyone mis-using his work in their own publication, as Linda G, said she intended to do with mine.
Chris Rufo is the self-claimed plagiarism warrior. And then he gets caught as party to plagiarism himself?
Smarten up, Bull! You are making very naive comments over this situation. As if you are not a grown-up, are not educated, and do not know how the modern world works.
Thank you - much appreciated.
If you want to play in even the middle leagues, Linda, do your homework. Learn how to use basic sources. I learned the first week of my undergrad years.
And do not plagiarize. Chris Rufo has partially built his reputation on going after plagiarists. You seem unaware of that fact, too.
Thank you for your apology, but then you go on to blame me anyway. Back-handed apology.
It was not me doing the mis-understanding. That was you. I have never before encountered anyone else on these Substack forums who mistakes my work for that of Chris Rufo. Or the work of anyone but myself.
It is NOT Chris Rufo who is using my work. It is you! He has nothing to do with your mistake. Although Chris will indeed benefit by being given credit for my work. You claim you are including it in your next self-published book, and attributing it to Chris Rufo. He has nothing to do with your actions here.
Every time you respond on this issue, you try to find a new way to put the blame on me. This time, you claim I have an anonymity problem. Where have you been these past 20 years, Linda? You have not picked up that Cancel Culture is a danger? And so many websites and cybersecurity experts recommend pseudonyms?
You are the one who continues to claim in your comments that you love and agree with the work you are reading, and that you believe it is Rufo's work. You do this when you are obviously replying to me and my posts. How can you mistake that? A "political analyst" knows the basic rules of plagiarism and attribution, Linda. Not to mention how to use comment forums. If you don't know how to use these forums, stop lifting material from them and attributing it to the wrong person.
I will try once more––I was always and only referring to Christopher F. Rufo’s work that I have personally read over the last two years. My mistake was thinking that in this instance I was "talking" to Christopher F. Rufo when I was actually "talking" to YOU. I am not blaming you. I have apologized for my error, and have never read a single word that you have written outside of these comments in the last two days. Lifting material? Attributing it to the wrong person? Surely you are joking. My book has already been published, and you are not in it!
For what it's worth, I think A here is way off base. I'll look for your book. Where do you hope to have it published?
P.S.
I just went to "Pundicity" and will read the chapters you've posted there. Best of luck!
Many thanks. The book is now available on barnesandnoble.com and amazon.com for those who want a hard copy.
You still don't get it, BH, do you? You are still attempting to look as if you have the upper hand. You cannot admit your mistakes and belligerent behaviour because of them. Although it is all very clear in these posts.
Some people make denial a way of life. You have to keep up your ruse now because otherwise you look pretty stewpid. Well....we can all see that anyway,
Well, I tried to cool it, but I suppose now I have to tussle since you annoyed me by being a horse's ass. Before I begin ignoring your bizarre comments, I want to say I think you're a paranoid nut who takes these discussions far too seriously and who apparently believes his comments on a Substack reader's forum are interesting enough to justify telling someone not to quote him. And you have the crust to assume you speak for other anonymous subscribers. "We"? OK A-hole.
You contradict yourself with each new post you write. Too funny!
You and Linda are made for each other. Leave the rest of us alone to do things with decency and intelligence.
We call people who use your tactics: Passive-Aggressive.
You call yourself a political analyst, Linda, but you have no idea how to use the basic information sources such as Substack and the comment boards?
Hm-m-m.
I see you begin your comment here by treating me a a stupid child, as in, "I will try once more." That placed the supposed credibility in your court, you believe. Positioning the other person as the dummie from the start.
You stated very openly in a comment of yours that you were lifting material here from my posts, and attributing it in your self-publishing to Chris Rufo. You seemed to be proud of knowing enough to attribute material. Trouble was....you intend to attribute to the wrong person.
There is nothing stopping anyone from self-publishing never-ending material. There is no limit. That excuse of having finished your book does not hold water. And digital versions can be changed regularly.
Why did you boast, then, of using my material under Chris Rufo's name? If you intend to self-publish no more?
Your "work"? Get thee to a publishing house.
🤣
They come to me, actually.
But you would not know anything about that world. I think it's foreign to you.
What is this, a shitty Trump imitation?