I would tend to agree but one piece of information is still missing. Was the policy of TC relative to "compensations" made very clear to Daniel when he started ? If it was, then Daniel has no excuse since he transgressed clearly stated rules. If the rules were only implicit and assumed to be known and followed by authors then Daniel may be excused by his age since his education is not yet complete and he still needs time to mature.
The knowledge of good and bad builds up and refines itself with age through experiences. Note that a lot of adults are still confused about this limit in some domains like for instance exchanging and using unpayed copies of films and musics.
The integrity and reputation of TC is in play here so the prompt and radical reaction was legitimate. The communication was also a good move to make clear that such behavior is not in line with TC ethics.
Whether the collaboration with Daniel should have been terminated or not depends on his responsibility.
Turning public about this incident is a clear error of Daniel which may be another demonstration of his inexperience or bad advice given to him. This new error would have remained unnoticed if TC didn't advertise it.
My impression is that TC behaves with Daniel as if he was an adult, which he clearly isn't. This makes it much more difficult for Daniel to learn from his errors because the back burn is quite devastating and probably excessive.
I hope Daniel manage to learn the lessons, and I hope TC used this opportunity to learn some lessons too.
So in conclusion it is still not clear if Daniel is the only one to blame here. However the aim shouldn't be to know who to blame, but to make sure that everyone managed to learn what has to be learned and correct his behavior in consequence.
You are right, but does the act qualify as bribe ?
In my opinion, it would be a bribe if the compensation was presented as a condition to write and publish the article. Otherwise it may be interpreted as a tip which is then not so obviously bad because it is a common practice.
The problem with tips, especially in the US, as far as I know, is that it is kind of perverted. It should be a free gift expressing gratitude and recognition, but it is often considered by the receiver as a due and even the amount is often codified and considered an implicit agreement. This is so strong that not giving a tip is socially considered bad.
In France and most European countries tips are thankfully not considered as a due and requesting a tip is even considered rude, especially if the amount is specified.
So what if the author (US) interpreted his compensation requests as a tip ? It could have been considered as normal from his perspective since it is so common.
The information that would help clarifying our mind on this is if the author has put the compensation as a condition to write the article or not. As long as we don't know this, making any judgment in one way or the other is just poor judgment, that's all I tried to explain in my previous answer. From this perspective the down vote is a bit disappointing.
Perhaps that's because bribes, beyond Tips to waiters & taxi drivers, are not very prevalent in American society. What if you'd grown up in India, China, or Indonesia where small bribes to you your job are a fact of every day life. Would you ever learn that they're "wrong" if they're culturally accepted?
I understand what you're getting at, but he lives in the US, and as far as I know grew up here. It'd be nice to learn more about exactly what happened before making judgement, but if he really demanded an unsolicited bribe I don't think his age really excuses it.
The knowledge of good and bad builds up and refines itself with age through experiences. Note that a lot of adults are still confused about this limit in some domains like for instance exchanging and using unpayed copies of films and musics.
The integrity and reputation of TC is in play here so the prompt and radical reaction was legitimate. The communication was also a good move to make clear that such behavior is not in line with TC ethics. Whether the collaboration with Daniel should have been terminated or not depends on his responsibility.
Turning public about this incident is a clear error of Daniel which may be another demonstration of his inexperience or bad advice given to him. This new error would have remained unnoticed if TC didn't advertise it.
My impression is that TC behaves with Daniel as if he was an adult, which he clearly isn't. This makes it much more difficult for Daniel to learn from his errors because the back burn is quite devastating and probably excessive.
I hope Daniel manage to learn the lessons, and I hope TC used this opportunity to learn some lessons too.
So in conclusion it is still not clear if Daniel is the only one to blame here. However the aim shouldn't be to know who to blame, but to make sure that everyone managed to learn what has to be learned and correct his behavior in consequence.