‘The Holdovers’ Accused of Plagiarism by ‘Luca’ Screenwriter

The difference is that Yoda along with everyone else in this thread is looking to let sleeping dogs lie, while Siddon keeps bumping the thread to start the argument back up. He even went as far to mention Yoda's username and ping his account to alert him back to this thread when he wrote this:

That's why Siddon continuing to beat a dead horse in this thread is much sillier than Yoda responding to his thread bump. Siddon and Yoda are incomparable in this instance. To the point I'm a little surprised Yoda's being called out by a couple users.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

Eh? I didn't say I was above it. I don't know if you bothered to read the post I was responding to, but it was countering the idea that this is something happening to him, rather than something he's instigating.

Most of us would have completely forgotten about the whole thing if Siddon wasn't constantly bumping up the thread.

When someone makes an allegation and nothing ever comes of it, 99.99% of people will forget it ever happened.

But clearly, not everyone forgets.

I think it's just users who've popped in at the end and haven't been following any of this. And when people do that the null hypothesis is usually that the guy everyone's railing on must be a victim of bullying, because it's really unusual that that person would invariably be the aggressor. But a few minutes of scrolling shows that to be the case.

I don't mind people expecting that, but it is pretty lame not to so much as skim to confirm it. Or, ya' know, ask.

Plus the fact that he's done something fairly similar in the Blake Lively thread...

Yeah, this thread is feeing deja vu with ueno being called out for Siddon's bullying in the 29th Hall of Fame.

Unrelated to the immediate topic at hand. I'm not sure why you aren't using the quote tag functionality of the site (my immediate guess is just not seeing the reply icon), but if you hit reply above someone's post, it'll wrap their post in a quote tag. It's useful for alerting the person that someone responded to something they wrote, let's people reading your reply know who you're replying to and gives them a link to the post in case they're trying to work back to figure out what the context is (and is just visually better at conveying a block of text is being quoted).





If you're replying to multiple people/posts, I often just hit reply it two different browsers (to each) and copy & paste the auto-generated text from into the other. IDK if there's an easier way to do it, but that's been simple enough for me.

At the point that you have a pile-on with mod engagement, it's just an ugly scene. It would be nice to see people ease back.

Most us, I think, would agree that Siddon, in other contexts, has proved to be a quality poster over a period of many years. Does anyone really care that much about the thread topic?

I get that there is a pattern of behavior being alleged here, but even so, how do we put the fire out? How can we bring our friend back into the fold of casual conversation?

It would, yeah. And there've been a few good faith attempts to take the temperature down (including in my very last reply), publicly and privately, to no avail.

Only Siddon, whose interest in it is appears to be restricted to whether it provides an opportunity to shove something in someone else's face. Which is so important that it requires imagining disagreement in order to have more faces to shove things in.

That's precisely what I asked myself/precisely what I've been trying to do. I can see the point of view that says "even if you're right and even if he's instigating all this, it's unseemly to let these threads stay open once they get to this point." I have two responses to that.

First: when things are this far gone, any thread closure will be met with an accusation of censorship. That's par for the course, but it's to be avoided when possible. When people start trying to save face they can make accusations that still have to be taken seriously, even if anyone paying attention will see it for what it is.

Second (and more importantly): this same pattern has played out in other threads, and it's clear it will keep happening. That can't go on forever, so trying to explain those patterns and why they keep causing these (completely unnecessary) confrontations is the only alternative to banning. So in that sense it's my honest-to-God attempt to keep them around, in the probably naďve hope that the situation can be fixed, or at least improved. Which I want to do both as a general rule, and in particular here because I think Siddon's contributions on cinema are insightful and valuable and it would be a shame to lose them.

But ultimately that means they have to respond in kind when someone reaches out, as I have more than once.

There is, yeah! Just hit the little settings cog/gear in the top right above each post and hit "Multi-quote." The word will turn yellow, and you can do that with multiple posts and then just hit Reply to Topic and they'll all be waiting for you there.

I won't get bogged down in this sewer of a thread (despite being pinged by Yoda privately). Let's just say I don't see things precisely as you do.

I have no opinion about Siddon's conspiracy theories concerning major studios running smear campaigns related to awards season (his points would have been better without those claims, anyway). I do, however, believe that his original claim that the plagiarism claim was BS seems more and more likely. He has also argued his side of the plagiarism discussion far better than the whole army he's facing (who are either arguing semantics or parroting the original claim to which Siddon, eventually, replied and has posted several links explaining its issues).

This is my final reply to this thread, no need to ping me further.

__________________

It is almost entirely beside the point - the only thing any of us know for sure is that an allegation was made. Nothing more.

Whoa wait a minute here, it’s too convenient to have your say and then leave without allowing us a moment to clarify a few things.
I seriously doubt you have gone through all of these posts, or read each of the links provided that actually supports Siddons claims because those have been addressed.
Yoda has done a far better job arguing his points in a far more calm manner, addressing these points
It has been Siddon, from the beginning, who has been combative and at times, antagonistic, in his approach when anyone has countered him.

You can not seriously come away from this thread thinking Siddon has been actively continuing on this discussion in good faith.

Now, have the rest of us openly mocked Siddon? Of course. We’re tired of his shenanigans. Has it gone too far? I’ll concede that it has. Some of us (especially me) probably should have considered our posts before we openly mocked him.
But that hasn’t been Yoda.

Feel free to post or not. But it’s a little disingenuous to come in at the end and cherry pick the last few posts/pages without reading the whole thread and judging it as a whole.

That's evident. What I was asking is if you saw things differently because you were unaware of the basic facts. Specifically, it seems to make very little sense to ask about a 'war against' someone when that someone is the one resurrecting the argument over and over. Since you haven't answered, I'm going to assume the answer is 'yes.'

I wrote out a reply to the rest but I hardly see the point if you've already said you're not going to explain anything. Which is ironic because the whole 'here's my opinion, don't bother me with follow-ups' posture is part of the problem. The whole vibe seems to be that it should be okay to just say stuff and not be questioned, or that we should just breeze past misstatements or faulty logic, because anything not directly speaking to the conclusion is 'semantics.'

I have no clue what is happening here. All I know is my two year old chocolate lab, Etta, drives Toyota!

__________________
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below

http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201

Obviously you don't need to have any idea what's happening to have an opinion. Just pop in, skim the last page, and make your accusations. This is the Internet, after all.

Aw.

https://letterboxd.com/film/jaccuse-1919/

Great film.

Okay, at this point it's clear this thread won't die, but that the discussion also never advances. It's been bumped three times with no actual updates. The last bump was an assortment of links that had literally nothing to do with this case, which is the clearest evidence yet that this is just grasping for dunk fodder that isn't there.

I'm going to repost this paragraph, because it explains why this has been allowed to continue as long as it has:

My posture as a mod, historically, has been to take action only when I was sure it was absolutely necessary. This has often meant that stuff goes on a lot longer than necessary, because I think that's better than wondering if I was too quick to judge someone. But after many good faith attempts to communicate (or even just deescalate slightly) have failed both publicly and privately, I'm unfortunately satisfied on that front.

So I'm closing this thread, and any future posts elsewhere that mirror this dynamic will be removed. And if I have to do this more than occasionally, further action will be taken. People should be able to talk about the occasional Hollywood drama without it turning into the same toxic ouroboros every time.

If someone feels this is unfair, they can contact me directly and receive a full and transparent accounting, with receipts, and free reign to make their case. And I'll go a step further: I will gladly have a real time voice chat with Siddon or anyone else about this. It will be civil and substantive, and you can record it and everything. I welcome it, because something tells me that once we're in a different medium, where people can't pick and choose what to reply to and what to ignore, it'll become pretty hard to deny what's happening and why.

That's a standing offer. And yes, I will notice who takes me up on this and who doesn't. And yes, if and when certain people don't I will take it as implicit confirmation of various things. If you don't like that, well, I've given you a way to dispute it. Surprise me.

Update: nobody has taken me up on this. Still offering.