You know the song.

*bros
not boys

you didn't destroy me in an argument. and I'm not complaining I'm correcting.

I demolished you, and I know this because you aren't even replying to that conversation anymore, and instead you're trying to find any problem with my previous memes to try and get at me.

as if. the only reason I'm not responding to it is that, quite honestly, you are as stubborn as a brick wall. and ill look at your memes to find evidence that you have reposted and are no better than anyone else who reposts memes.

Yeah good luck with that. I doubt you'll find a single meme that I have made that is a repost. If you do, I'll gladly take it down.

And even if you do, that still doesn't make it okay for other people to repost on the fun stream just because I also reposted once a few years back. You do realize that, right?

I'm not saying it is, what I'm saying is that if it is an honest mistake, it should not be considered a repost, and the maker should not be accused of reposting, but instead of an honest mistake that just about everyone has made.

I literally made this image a template because people make this argument all the time.

Reposts are not allowed on the fun stream. And as I said before, your intentions don't make a meme any different. It's still the same meme whether you knew about the other one or not.

And I even gave you a good example of a similar scenario. Just because you commit a crime ignorantly, doesn't mean it's not a crime.

I know that. but reposting and crime are different. the word reposting means "post again" and if one is not posting a meme again but instead posting an original mem that is the same as another, it's not reposting. plagiarism is more like reposting, and if you were unaware of an article or document that contained the same idea as yours, it's not plagiarism.

“yes, you can. if I were to do it unknowingly, then later see a meme that is the same and that predates mine, I would know that it was unintentional and I would remove my meme.”

I know that YOU can know if you intendedly reposted or not. And I can do the same to myself.
But we’re talking about a completely different guy. And there’s no way to find out if he did or not.

"I'm saying that any truly accidental copy of a meme is not an intentional repost."

But as you admitted earlier, you can never know if it's truly an accident.

yes, but if it is, it's still an accident.

there's no way to know if it's unintentional, so you can never use that event.

yes, you can. if I were to do it unknowingly, then later see a meme that is the same and that predates mine, I would know that it was unintentional and I would remove my meme.

You're trying to use a conclusion from Acadamia, a question-asking website, with an answer from the professional writer's guild, to try and prove that a meme on imgflip, a website that is not associated with Academia or the professional scholar world at all, and has its own subset of rules as to what defines a repost, to try and prove that a meme that was unintentionally reposted isn't a repost. Seriously?

That was all one sentence. Wow.

Since when did imgflip become some stand-in for the research career field?

"and I know that he may just be saying that he didn't know."

Then everything you just said is irrelevant. Because now there is literally no way to know if he's just saying it or not.

how does that make everything I said irrelevant? I'm not saying that he made a mistake, but there is a chance that he could have. and so what if I'm using a conclusion from Academia? and I'm not trying to prove that a single meme is not plagiarism. I'm saying that any truly accidental copy of a meme is not an intentional repost.

"if" isn't an absolute. You can never know. Period.

I'm not saying it's an absolute, but "if" means "in the event that" and I know there's no way to know, I'm agreeing with you about that. but in the event that it was unintentional...

"but reposting and crime are different."
I know. I never said they were the same thing. I was using that as a scenario to compare it to the scenario we are in.

But you are in fact doing what you claim I'm doing. You're saying that reposting a meme is the same as plagiarism in a scholarly environment.

They aren't the same. The whole thing about plagiarism is talking about IDEAS. Reposts are not just using the same idea for a meme. It is literally the exact same thing as the old version. It's essentially copy and paste. Not just copy the idea.

Also, I never brought this up yet, but according to your proposal, if someone legitimately and intentionally reposts a meme, and we accuse him of reposting, he can just lie to us and say that he didn't mean to, and shield himself from any criticism because he lied about it.

There is no real way to prove if the guy didn't know the meme existed before hand, and no his comment saying he didn't know doesn't work.

But even then, unintentional reposts are still reposts, and they should be treated as such.

I get that you were using crime as a simile to reposts, but plagiarism is much more relatable to reposts. and I believe that reposting is a form of plagiarism. it is copying an idea if intentional and deliberate. but if done unknowingly, it isn't plagiarism and isn't a repost. and I know that he may just be saying that he didn't know.