Scratch, DCP, and the IRS

[_Yoda]

Ray, that's exactly it. I have endeavored to try and untangle this big mess, but, generally speaking, all I have gotten is vague and confusing answers from DCP.

And exactly what makes it your right, or your business, for that matter, to "untangle this mess", if, in fact, it needs untangling?

I'm with Harmony on this one. DCP gave you answers. They weren't the answers you wanted to hear. You don't believe him when he says that his payments through BYU were for academic rather than apologetic work.

Frankly, I really don't care one way or the other. Since BYU is a religious university, it all gets rather muddled, at best, anyway. And, to be honest, I think that's the way most posters (both pro and anti DCP ) feel.

The point is, you are going to have an endless "he said/he said" argument, with you calling DCP a liar, and DCP saying, "no, I'm not."

The only ones who actually KNOW what DCP was paid for are DCP, and those who DCP answered to at BYU.

Since you aren't going to get free access to those who he reported to at BYU, I think you either need to take DCP at his word, or, shrug your shoulders, say he's lying, but you have NO PROOF, and move on.

[_Jersey Girl]

Ray, that's exactly it. I have endeavored to try and untangle this big mess, but, generally speaking, all I have gotten is vague and confusing answers from DCP.

And exactly what makes it your right, or your business, for that matter, to "untangle this mess", if, in fact, it needs untangling?

I'm with Harmony on this one. DCP gave you answers. They weren't the answers you wanted to hear. You don't believe him when he says that his payments through BYU were for academic rather than apologetic work.

Frankly, I really don't care one way or the other. Since BYU is a religious university, it all gets rather muddled, at best, anyway. And, to be honest, I think that's the way most posters (both pro and anti DCP ) feel.

The point is, you are going to have an endless "he said/he said" argument, with you calling DCP a liar, and DCP saying, "no, I'm not."

The only ones who actually KNOW what DCP was paid for are DCP, and those who DCP answered to at BYU.

Since you aren't going to get free access to those who he reported to at BYU, I think you either need to take DCP at his word, or, shrug your shoulders, say he's lying, but you have NO PROOF, and move on.

Amen.

[_Jersey Girl]

From my POV it's all inadequately defined. When does DCP put on his apologetic hat, and take off his apologetic hat? Does he spend two hours working on METI, then another two hours doing an FROB editorial? When he travels abroad to lecture on Islam, is he paid for that only, excluding, for example, any talks/firesides on apologetics? It seems to me to be a mishmash, all intermingled. Or, perhaps, maybe he has a record book where he separates time spend on various projects.

If I as an employee spend my employer's time reading Mormon apologetics, am I being paid to read apologetics? The work still gets done, even if my free time during working hours is spent reading apologetics. That is why I find the distinctions a mishmash.

Ray, that's exactly it. I have endeavored to try and untangle this big mess, but, generally speaking, all I have gotten is vague and confusing answers from DCP.

Unless I am seriously reading Ray wrong, he is simply saying that it's difficult to determine where and to what to attribute certain activities.

He is NOT agreeing with your evaluation that any of this is a "big mess".

Ray? What say you?

[_Jersey Girl]

Fourth time for Scratch.

Third time for Scratch.

Tell me how you think he (Jason) was totally confused/misinformed about the Board Chair fee.

I'd like you to support your assertion that Jason was totally confused/misinformed about the Board Chair fee.

[_antishock8]

From my POV it's all inadequately defined. When does DCP put on his apologetic hat, and take off his apologetic hat? Does he spend two hours working on METI, then another two hours doing an FROB editorial? When he travels abroad to lecture on Islam, is he paid for that only, excluding, for example, any talks/firesides on apologetics? It seems to me to be a mishmash, all intermingled. Or, perhaps, maybe he has a record book where he separates time spend on various projects.

If I as an employee spend my employer's time reading Mormon apologetics, am I being paid to read apologetics? The work still gets done, even if my free time during working hours is spent reading apologetics. That is why I find the distinctions a mishmash.

No. Not really. I was recently hired on a contract basis to do some things for a company out here. My employer made it very clear that I was to do the work on my own time, and that it wouldn't interfere with their business. The contracting company made it clear that I was to conduct business for them in a very specific manner. Everyone had a CLEAR understanding about my 1) time, 2) job scope, and 3) pay.

I can only reason that the IRS takes very similar views with one's income, hence the differing forms and space available to explain, in detail, where the money went.

The idea that Mr. Peterson is fuzzy on the details, or it's something he can't be bothered with, therefore his income and who pays it is a pish posh minor detail that's unanswerable is most likely an obfuscation on his part. And if it's not, and he's truly unaware of his income and who pays it and for what and how to report it... Well, then he's not very bright when it comes to money matters.

[_The Nehor]

From my POV it's all inadequately defined. When does DCP put on his apologetic hat, and take off his apologetic hat? Does he spend two hours working on METI, then another two hours doing an FROB editorial? When he travels abroad to lecture on Islam, is he paid for that only, excluding, for example, any talks/firesides on apologetics? It seems to me to be a mishmash, all intermingled. Or, perhaps, maybe he has a record book where he separates time spend on various projects.

If I as an employee spend my employer's time reading Mormon apologetics, am I being paid to read apologetics? The work still gets done, even if my free time during working hours is spent reading apologetics. That is why I find the distinctions a mishmash.

No. Not really. I was recently hired on a contract basis to do some things for a company out here. My employer made it very clear that I was to do the work on my own time, and that it wouldn't interfere with their business. The contracting company made it clear that I was to conduct business for them in a very specific manner. Everyone had a CLEAR understanding about my 1) time, 2) job scope, and 3) pay.

I can only reason that the IRS takes very similar views with one's income, hence the differing forms and space available to explain, in detail, where the money went.

The idea that Mr. Peterson is fuzzy on the details, or it's something he can't be bothered with, therefore his income and who pays it is a pish posh minor detail that's unanswerable is most likely an obfuscation on his part. And if it's not, and he's truly unaware of his income and who pays it and for what and how to report it... Well, then he's not very bright when it comes to money matters.

Not comparable. I've done both. I worked for a company where my services were loaned to another company. The company's accountant took care of everything and I just continued to get my check. I had no idea how much of it was paid by each group or the accounting behind it. I've also done contract work while holding a salaried position (right now actually). Now I take care to keep precise records of all my contract activities for tax reasons and keep all my business expenses separate.

One required no effort and I could remain ignorant and do my job. The other I had to take much more care.

[_antishock8]

Not comparable. I've done both. I worked for a company where my services were loaned to another company. The company's accountant took care of everything and I just continued to get my check. I had no idea how much of it was paid by each group or the accounting behind it. I've also done contract work while holding a salaried position (right now actually). Now I take care to keep precise records of all my contract activities for tax reasons and keep all my business expenses separate.

One required no effort and I could remain ignorant and do my job. The other I had to take much more care.

You mean you and your employers didn't have a CLEAR understanding about your 1) time, 2) job scope, and 3) pay?

[_Ray A]

Unless I am seriously reading Ray wrong, he is simply saying that it's difficult to determine where and to what to attribute certain activities.

He is NOT agreeing with your evaluation that any of this is a "big mess".

Ray? What say you?

It would be a "big mess" for anyone trying to unravel it. I wouldn't attempt it, nor would I even be interested in attempting it.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. When a person wears multiple academic "hats", so to speak, only he can really define how his time is spent, and I suppose it's his right to state what he's paid for, or not paid for. If DCP had a holiday house on the Isle of Capri, or was taking frequent Hawaii holidays with secret girlfriends, then I'd say it would well be worth pursuing. But he's part of a monolithic Church of which he happens to "apologise" (as in apologetics) for. I haven't seen any corruption, unless you call mingling apologetics with academia corruption. So again I go back to my original point, when does DCP wear his apologetic hat, and when does he take it off?

I think the original point was the denial that some apologetics is paid. I think it is in some cases, but see nothing wrong with that. It was the claim that others are paid, but Mormon apologists are not, that aroused ire from some. Clearly some apologists are not paid, for example Blake Ostler:

Blake T. Ostler is a partner in the Salt Lake City law firm of Mackey Price Thompson & Ostler. Mr. Ostler concentrates his practice in the areas of civil litigation, education law, special education, employment law, construction law, intellectual property litigation and real property law.

In 1981, Mr. Ostler graduated from Brigham Young University with a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy (summa cum laude) and a Bachelor of Science in Psychobiology (magna cum laude). He then graduated in 1985 as a William Leary Scholar from the University of Utah with a Juris Doctorate (cum laude).

The "mess" is the fact that DCP is a high profile apologist not independently employed as Ostler is, outside of any Church institutions. If he (DCP) was, there would be no issue here, at least for those who want to pursue it.

[_Jersey Girl]

Chiming in on the pay thing here.

I'm paid over and above my regular pay for a specific job that I do in addition to my job description. I'm paid on a stipend basis. There are no specific guidelines with regards to how many hours I will devote to the various "tasks" needed. Some of the "tasks" I do overlap or happen simultaneously within the parameters of my job description.

Regardless, the stipend amount stays the same no matter how many hours I put in to the extra assignment.

Editing: I was having a in real life conversation when I typed the above, was it clear as mud?

Pay for Job Description Duties @ specific # of hours
Stipend for Extra Duties @ no specific # of hours

[_Mister Scratch]

Fourth time for Scratch.

Third time for Scratch.

Tell me how you think he (Jason) was totally confused/misinformed about the Board Chair fee.

I'd like you to support your assertion that Jason was totally confused/misinformed about the Board Chair fee.

Hello there, Jersey Girl. My apologies for not responding to this. You are on my "Ignore" list, so I seldom ever read your posts.

Anyways: sure, I'll be glad to support the assertion, but feel that it's only fair that you hold up part of the bargain on your end of things. To that end, I insist that you:

---apologize to me for your erratic and disquieting behavior toward me in the chat room
---apologize for recklessly perpetuating the rumor that Kerry Shirts was responsible for Mr. Itchy
---apologize for jerking me and Dr. Shades around when we asked you what you knew about Mr. Itchy.

So, if you'd be so kind as to oblige me on these points, I'd be glad to answer your request.