Reading my trip reports on “One Mile during a Time…”

It’s pretty common for my trip reports to just be plagiarized on other websites, though it’s not something I give much thought to. After all, this is the interwebs, and I have better stuff to do, like watch funny cat videos on YouTube.

A reader, however, passes along a link to a Singapore Airlines trip report I wrote last year, which has been posted to this site. Only that version is much, much awesomer. And they credit it to “One Mile during a Time.”

Definitely worth a read, in my opinion. Not sure if it went through a double translator or what, but I’ve certainly picked up some new phrases from it. From now I’ll be ordering potions of Krug instead of glasses.


  1. Some of my favorites:

    – “And my crony systematic muesli.”
    – “At this indicate we was far-reaching watchful so motionless to watch a few sitcoms on a party system.”
    – “Toon set a list with a flare and blade placed by a side of a image correctly”

    This is like reading Mad Libs.

  2. Wow! This is scary stuff. Is there anything that you can do about it or rather do you plan to do something about it. I wonder what are your choices and what should be your best possible response?

  3. Lucky,

    You can always do a whois on the web site to see who it is registered to. It might not help a lot but doesn’t hurt. For example the following email address is attached to it:

    I’m sure others who do this stuff can help you better but I have no use for people who steal stuff even if they provide a reference to the original.

  4. The copy has been “spun” somehow to keep Google from picking it up as plagiarized, but the photos aren’t spun, and it’s possible that there could still be a problem of duplicate content. Therefore it might be wise to complain to Google whether you have better things to do or not, lest their robots idiotically shut you out of search as well as blocking the low quality site that “borrowed” your trip report. I’ve heard of it happening to other victims of plagiarism, and now Google can match photos so it could be more than just a joke. Not sure yet how this applies to places where you have actually given permission for someone to use reprint rights, which I have sometimes done in the past. But Google is supposedly on a tear against duplicate content, and the plagiarist’s precautions against getting caught are not actually all that good.

  5. It seems to be “scam city” at its best. Sorry you are affected.
    The site also has a lot of local Balinese and Indian info on it.

  6. I have to agree with @peachfront. You can easily be the one losing out on the duplicate content front, so I’d be more aggressive in stopping it…..

  7. My favorite of all: “first class” spits out as “initial category”!

    (Though “Once we done it to a runway…” Is pretty classic as well!

  8. “ordered” -> “systematic” and “flight” -> “moody” were a few of the funny ones too, or so I thought.

  9. Come on, folks. Calm down. It’s most likely a Balinese local trying to get some tourist business through his web site. And he’s unable to provide his own content, from lack of English fluency. Ask nicely and, if he’s as considerate as most Balinese, he’ll take it down.

    From my 6 trips to Bali in the last 10 years, this is what I’ve gathered from informal conversations with locals. Most tourist dollars in Bali go to international hotel chains or businesses owned by Indonesians based in Java. Locals feel shut out of the economy. All the while, development is ruining the natural beauty of the island. Don’t get them started on the traffic…

    Plagiarism? First world problem.

  10. Black Hat SEOs do this all the time. It’s called “spinning” an article by replacing words with synonyms. Obviously the tech is pretty crude and does not produce natural language. However, Google usually can’t tell the difference because Google does keyword density/combination analysis. They’re not spinning for a human audience. It’s just to make Google think they have lots of quality content. They then link from that site to other similar sites. They create entire networks of these sites giving each other “authority”. They then link out to money-making sites which they want to give travel-related search engine ranking authority.

  11. I agree with wfb, this stuff is funny as s&%t. Why get all worked up and uppity about it (not that I am suggesting Ben is doing so). Heck, the guy could have copied it word for word and instead decided to “add value” by paraphrasing in a hilarious way.

  12. Some other bits I found hilarious:

    “We waited for a initial and business category cabin to dull out a bit, that authorised me to snap a few cinema of a initial category cabin.”

    “look” -> “demeanour”

    “For a categorical march we had comparison a prawns.”

    “It creates Emirates initial category demeanour low key.”

    Still can’t stop laughing over “systematic” though…

  13. “Plagiarism? First world problem.”

    That neither excuses nor justifies what they did. Wrong is wrong. To be fair, he does provide a link to Lucky’s original post.

    The “I speak London very best” part does crack me up. Some other hilarious bits:

    *we betrothed her cooking a subsequent time she has a layover in a US
    *As we began a skirmish we altered behind into my jeans and a t-shirt
    *we had a punch of them and they were unequivocally good, so we rarely suggest them if you’re drifting this route.
    *we can’t explain it, yet it never ceases to stir me.

  14. Any chance you idle in Anonymous’s IRC? 😀

    Obviously I kid, Lahaina’s idea is much more reasonable.

  15. When talking about “Plagiarism”, I think it usually suggests someone taking other’s work without crediting the author or putting references. In this case, a USA today link is given.

    So I think they are using Lucky’s trip report to generate profit for themselves but that’s not “Plagiarism” for me …

  16. Anyone want to have a bit more fun? Google “moody attendant” systematic and have a look at the results… 😀

  17. Or simply “crony systematic”… looks like this website’s not the only using the same automatic thesaurus…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *