1 quotation, five citations. where does the fucking quote come from? padding your 'bibliography' does not help your case, it makes it look like you don't understand how to attribute a quotation, i do not know which or have any reason to believe all these sources support the quote
Reminds me of when I would pad bibliographies in high school, I'd just copy paste a bunch of sources like this completely unrelated to the essay to make it look like I did more research than I did.
Wait, did teachers not actually check whether your source material checks out or not?
I mean it makes sense from a work stance where you could be dealing with 20+ individual essays with at minimum average of 5 or so sources, the average person may say fuck that lmao
Nope. I tested it out, when reference the date I accessed a source, I would put dates like "Porktober" in there, never got any questions from the teacher. This was high school and not like uni or anything, so I'm guessing the teachers didn't care as long as I wasn't plagiarizing.
Got bored so I decided to check the books/authors.
Book #1 is written by a German who moved to South America after WWII. Fun starter.
Book #2 is from 1955, I can't imagine a Western author would have access to Soviet sources at that time.
Book #3 has one result when I google it, which is the wikipedia page you copied this from.
Article #4 is also before Soviet archives were open to the West, and is from some journal called "Slavic Review", which seems to specialize in Barry Goldwater esque psychoanalysis of Soviet leaders.
Book #5 is a collection of academic articles. Whoever added this citation does not appear to have actually read it, as the citation does not mention which article in the book is relevant.
Hey, can we get a kind of ban where the post remains (so it’s easier to understand the dunks), but like we put a dunce hat on it or something? Obv posts that are hurtful to our trans or non-mayo comrades still get the treatment
However, in practice, between 1936 and 1989, voters could vote against candidates preselected by the Communist Party only by spoiling their ballots, or by voting against the only candidate, whereas votes for the party candidates could be cast simply by submitting a blank ballot. Nohlen, D & Stöver, P (2010) Elections in Europe: A data handbook, p1642 ISBN 978-3-8329-5609-7 Carson, George Barr (1955). Electoral Practices in the U.S.S.R. F.A. Praeger. KOGAN, MICHAEL (2012). "SHAPING SOVIET JUSTICE: Popular responses to the election of people's courts, 1948-1954". Cahiers du Monde russe. 53 (1): 121–139. doi:10.4000/monderusse.9370. ISSN 1252-6576. JSTOR 23418027. Getty, J. Arch (1991). "State and Society under Stalin: Constitutions and Elections in the 1930s". Slavic Review. 50 (1): 18–35. doi:10.2307/2500596. JSTOR 2500596 Jessen, Ralph; Richter, Hedwig, eds. (2011). Voting for Hitler and Stalin: Elections Under 20th Century Dictatorships. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-3-593-39489-3.
Sounds almost identical to how American elections work with regards to how people can behave while voting or not voting, but caveat being that American politicians work for the capitalist class whereas Soviet politicians worked for the working class.
All I got from this comment is that Soviet democracy does work in practice because there's still all the dumb shit voters can do still being allowed.
Removed by mod
1 quotation, five citations. where does the fucking quote come from? padding your 'bibliography' does not help your case, it makes it look like you don't understand how to attribute a quotation, i do not know which or have any reason to believe all these sources support the quote
it's copypasted from wikipedia :)
Reminds me of when I would pad bibliographies in high school, I'd just copy paste a bunch of sources like this completely unrelated to the essay to make it look like I did more research than I did.
Wait, did teachers not actually check whether your source material checks out or not?
I mean it makes sense from a work stance where you could be dealing with 20+ individual essays with at minimum average of 5 or so sources, the average person may say fuck that lmao
Nope. I tested it out, when reference the date I accessed a source, I would put dates like "Porktober" in there, never got any questions from the teacher. This was high school and not like uni or anything, so I'm guessing the teachers didn't care as long as I wasn't plagiarizing.
Man, I could've had an easier time in high-school if I wasn't so damn honest in my laziness back then
They said High School, so that's 20+ per class
Got bored so I decided to check the books/authors.
Book #1 is written by a German who moved to South America after WWII. Fun starter.
Book #2 is from 1955, I can't imagine a Western author would have access to Soviet sources at that time.
Book #3 has one result when I google it, which is the wikipedia page you copied this from.
Article #4 is also before Soviet archives were open to the West, and is from some journal called "Slavic Review", which seems to specialize in Barry Goldwater esque psychoanalysis of Soviet leaders.
Book #5 is a collection of academic articles. Whoever added this citation does not appear to have actually read it, as the citation does not mention which article in the book is relevant.
SUMMARY: 0/5, see me after class.
Username checks out
Hey, can we get a kind of ban where the post remains (so it’s easier to understand the dunks), but like we put a dunce hat on it or something? Obv posts that are hurtful to our trans or non-mayo comrades still get the
treatment
modlog to the rescue:
spoiler
Sounds almost identical to how American elections work with regards to how people can behave while voting or not voting, but caveat being that American politicians work for the capitalist class whereas Soviet politicians worked for the working class.
All I got from this comment is that Soviet democracy does work in practice because there's still all the dumb shit voters can do still being allowed.