I have addressed this topic in two past posts of mine. I was calling this type of plagiarism as grey plagiarism, where one hasn't simply copy pasted and article, but neither is he the author of the article. I can't find the first one, it's probably over two years old, but found the second on Publish0x.
https://www.publish0x.com/httpswwwpublish0xcomacesontop/how-to-avoid-grey-plagiarism-xrylerl

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@acesontop/re-taskmaster4450le-yctek)

Stop paraphrasing @pusen's username. 😂

It's not so easy writing a cryptocurrency related post without external information, reason being that only project owners hold the first actual information about their work, after there on, interviewers and reporters hold the second.

That said, as third place writers as I've always pictured myself, doing research and trying to bring more audience to interesting topics, those informations is what we'd definitely want because we can't be putting up what's not there.

In that case, two choices are are placed in front of us, one is to directly quote with proper sourcing and two is to read, and summarize in your own terms using terms like "as reported by" "the head office stated" even without providing a link to every bit of details, those little phrases will make the readers understand that it's a research work and you ain't writing as if you were part of the project runners. 

However, I once found pleasure in digging plagiarism on leofinance.io until proofofbrain.io was born, and I discovered most of the plagiarists had moved there.

Here's a post of mine on paraphrasing : https://leofinance.io/@badbitch/askleo-should-paraphrasing-be-entertained

Which clearly showed how the intentions of the publisher was to bypass plagiarism bots and milk rewards. A genuine writer is known when spotted, so if it feels like plagiarism, the tools are available to gage the measures... 

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@badbitch/re-taskmaster4450le-2nd5dz)

Paraphrasing is ok I do it as well simply because I read articles from all over. However there does need to be a limit and it's hard to figure that out without a lot of work. It needs to be 1) Unique enough from the main article and 2) It should have the writers own thoughts and opinions on some of the topics they are talking about. It makes the article more interesting but also makes it more unique. It deserves a upvote if it's got those two things but if it's almost a cut and past of the original then in my opinion no. 

I had to check out the two posts before leaving this comment, and the post is identical. What he did was try to evade the plagiarism bot, by paraphrasing the work.  It's plagiarized. 

Most people's posts are not really noticeable because of the tool they use to paraphrase their text. 

But if you read them, you will find it a bit odd, and out of place. Sentences and words will be off. You will see old English language, like, "be that as it may" embedded somewhere in the text. And then, if you understood what the author was trying to talk about, you will notice the wordings didn't match. 

It usually feel as though a robot is writing, because, we humans are quite expressive with our thoughts. 

I am sadly embarrassed and disappointed in xplosive, I would never think of him doing a thing called paraphrasing



---

<center><sub>Posted via [proofofbrain.io](https://www.proofofbrain.io/@edystringz/qxvnlf)</sub></center>

It's still a rewritten article, by changing the words here and there, with the purpose of monetising it.

What's happened to original content? 

If *paraphrasing* as some like to call it, or quoting takes up the majority of the post, then it worth downvoting. That is milking the reward pool using other people's work. 

The mentioned author has had many outbursts because, according to him,  his posts have not received the expected attention. Now he has found a way to create "*good*" content by paraphrasing others for monetary purposes. Is this what we should be doing here? I don't think so!

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@erikah/re-taskmaster4450le-4kxqh3)

I guess it depends on how much percentage the entire article can paraphrasing, how much alike between two articles. An academic research paper also paraphrases if it is a continuation of another paper.

credit needs to be given to the original article when paraphrasing though.

Paraphrasing Plagiarism. It is a thing and it is real. 

I really want to read all my news here on leofinance. I don't want to have to go to coinmarketcap or any other place. 

I think it is a great idea to go over to those news sites and get ideas for what to write about here - let's just do it without commuting plagiarism. 

Paraphrasing Plagiarism.  

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@metzli/re-taskmaster4450le-kiwax)

In my opinion, paraphrasing is okay if you also add your own opinions and give credit to the paraphrased author. That is how it is done in academia. (Of course, I am grossly simplifying it.) 

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@mrtats/re-taskmaster4450le-6cl7cq)

I spend time finding good material in Russian, after which I abstract it and only then translate it. Yes, I did not mention the author, because the entire text was completely revised and translated. From now on, I will be more careful and will take into account the rules of the platform. Because in one day I got 6 downvotes because of plagiarism. It was shock for me. Because this is a huge work. After that my reputation was 5. Now I just write my thoughts nothing more.

I agree with you that it really comes down to doing the work and making it plainly visible you have done the work.
I could be smart and try to circumvent plagiarism by still loosely rephrasing sections of already existing content. Could be done half asleep.

I feel original content just has a fresh quality to it that is hard to pin down. Like when that kid in school turned in his homework assignment and teacher looks at him and says: "You obviously didn't write that!"

<center>![pixresteemer_incognito_angel_mini.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/pixresteemer/8h7BBw1w-pixresteemer_incognito_angel_mini.png)</center><center>Bang, I did it again... I just rehived your post!</center><center>Week 69 of my [contest](/hive-179017/@pixresteemer/the-re-hive-contest-results-week-68-and-start-week-69) just started...you can now check the winners of the previous week!</center><center><sub>8</sub></center>

I downvoted the post not for the pure act of paraphrasing/plagiarism but because I didn't agree with the rewards and I stand by that. Even if he had added the source it would still be a post worth downvoting in my opinion because he is still profiting from something someone else wrote. If he had added in his own thoughts and experiences it would have been another case but his post gave off the same information in different words.

When you're changing the words around and re-writing them you're still taking the original authors idea. When you present it as your own because it's in "your own words" that's still plagiarism. Plagiarism is so much more than copying something word from word. 

The reason why I spend time and energy on this is because I don't want Hive to be known as a place where people can profit from that. That is also part of the reason why I saw it as important to take away the rewards. If people from the outside see even a 1$ reward on a plagiarised post people will think Hive is that place. 

It's an interesting discussion this and I think it's a good thing you brought it up. I just hope this doesn't bring some bad repercussions upon @xplosive. He's a good guy who owned up to his mistake and I look forward to seeing his future posts and contributions.

If whole article is paraphrased, then it is plagiarism.
Regarding rewards, I consider it is not worthy of any rewards even with cited source. (unless it is done solely for translation )

If paraphrasing is rewarded then whole Hive will just become a hotbed for spamming as "paraphraser" can  post every hour, killing/suppressing the original "intellectual" value of Hive.


Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@r1s2g3/re-taskmaster4450le-5vbgmq)

I think 
- Plagiarism: copy exactly from others and make it yours - must be prohibited
- Paraphrasing : refer from others and change the words to make it yours. It's OK if the referred source is mentioned clearly in the post. If not, should not be OK

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@sodomlv/re-taskmaster4450le-5gffnp)