I'm not sure it's constructive to explain our differences, point by point. eg

> 2. is nothing about "following established traditions"

> undermine the traditional system of attribution

Literally does.

Suffice to say, I find your interpretations to be surprising and disconnected and it has not changed my views.

The actual thesis of point 2 is about plagiarism, and the thesis would remain the same if the sentence you quoted were removed completely. Your portrayal of it moves the out-of-context snippet to the forefont of the argument and makes it sound like an issue of "tradition for tradition's sake" or something similarly indefensible, but you refuse to engage with the real argument being made, hence why I suspect you are acting in bad faith. Are you suggesting that not attributing credit to work you've copied from is the way things should be going forward? If you are, then argue that point and make it earnestly. Instead you continue to avoid any substantial discussion of the points raised and only went for a cheap "gotcha".