Trib’s Second Article on John Dehlin

[Tator]

Right, wrong or indifferent John Dehlin sure has a bunch of butt-hurt critics.

[jpatterson]

It absolutely is actionable (the use of the word criminal here is loaded, as you're much more likely to get fined than thrown in jail for these types of offenses) to be WAY over the average in compensation if you're on the board of directors.

This is one of the points that gets overlooked, and speaks to the obsession John has with control.

There are two really really easy avenues for John to conduct himself with some integrity and ethics and still get paid as much as he does.

The first would be to resign from the Board of Directors and act solely as a content producer. Wall himself off from the people who make decisions about compensation and his employment. It's obviously a conflict of interest.

The second option would be to just take Open Stories Foundation or MSP public and, you know, pay your damn taxes. John could make a great living, probably the same or more than he's making now, without the headache of a board of directors or IRS rules getting in his way.

Why doesn't he do either of these things? Because there's no way in hell John would ever give control to anyone else (even though he says Open Stories Foundation's mission is bigger than himself). This is the guy who more than once has locked his entire organization out of the website and podcast and held it hostage until his demands were met. And there's no way in hell John is going to start paying taxes now that he's enjoyed the sweet, sweet nectar of tax-exempt revenue.

[jpatterson]

Right, wrong or indifferent John Dehlin sure has a bunch of butt-hurt critics.

I'll see your butt-hurt John Dehlin critics and raise you an entire board of butt-hurt Daniel Peterson critics.

[Tator]

Right, wrong or indifferent John Dehlin sure has a bunch of butt-hurt critics.

I'll see your butt-hurt John Dehlin critics and raise you an entire board of butt-hurt Daniel Peterson critics.

Waa, waa, waa, waaaaaah

[Binger]

Percentage of revenue makes as much sense as a benchmark for taxes as it does for salaries. Comparing salaries as a percentage of revenue is absurd.

Tell it to the IRS, which cares a lot about what percentage of revenues are going to the people in charge. It's called inurement.

Again, you're making yourself look silly here because you don't know what you're talking about.

Well, if the IRS has a standard that says one cannot be in the top 90 percent, top 95 percent or top 99 percent - they will always have criminals!

Inurement applies to distribution of assets and income. Again, this is not a formula driven by revenue. Revenue is part of a financial statement and it is higher up than income. It is also on a different statement than assets and a different statement from cash flows and distributions, but go on. Tell me again that percentage of revenue is THE formula.

[Marcus]

It's not criminal to be over the average for a category, and in my opinion you'd be better served by giving some idea of the variance, not just that his compensation is above the average. But beyond that, it comes down to people's decisions to donate. This continued, extremely vague position that 'something is wrong!' is not accomplishing anything.

It absolutely is actionable (the use of the word criminal here is loaded, as you're much more likely to get fined than thrown in jail for these types of offenses) to be WAY over the average in compensation if you're on the board of directors.

And I've already given you lots of data on salary variances. I've shown that John's salary is double the 90th percentile compared to peer non-profits. I've shown that religious podcasts that pull in the same revenue pay their leaders much much less than John. There's also a long paper trail of John bemoaning the fact that he has to work with a board of directors because it would be so much easier to just pay himself with tax-exempt donations without having to consult anyone else. There is evidence of board manipulation and lack of board oversight. It's all there.

You characterizing everything I've presented as "vague" is simply laughable and only tells me either you haven't actually read my posts or you're being obtuse for purposes of apologetics.

And if it were considered 'actionable' by those in charge, then you've done everything you can to report it, and it's out of your hands. All you're doing now is repeating information that's been known and discussed for quite a while.

But getting back to your statement,

It absolutely is actionable ...to be WAY over the average in compensation if you're on the board of directors.

Can you post the statutes or regulations that contain the schedule of fines that are used in penalizing officers compensated above the average for their category? I apologize if you've done that already, but I don't recall seeing that information.

[Binger]

Right, wrong or indifferent John Dehlin sure has a bunch of butt-hurt critics.

I'll see your butt-hurt John Dehlin critics and raise you an entire board of butt-hurt Daniel Peterson critics.

Oh Christ. Can someone call my sponsor? I have to agree with Marcus and jpatterson. Send a ambliance. I need a ambliance.

[jpatterson]

And if it were considered 'actionable' by those in charge, then you've done everything you can to report it, and it's out of your hands. All you're doing now is repeating information that's been known and discussed for quite a while.

I'm only here because the Trib published their article after a healthy delay, and then the article came up here for discussion, including me by name. I'm not the OP.

Again, I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, what I found out *was* actionable because we know the AG's office acted on it. What we don't know is the outcome, because the AG isn't talking and John refuses to release the supposed letter clearing his name. How does no one find this last fact really really odd??

It's like the AG's letter is the gold plates and John swears he has it and has shown it to several witnesses but won't reveal it to the world, for the world would trample it under its feet and only use it to get gain.

I'll address your IRS question in a bit...

[jpatterson]

Oh Christ. Can someone call my sponsor? I have to agree with Marcus and jpatterson. Send a ambliance. I need a ambliance.

You can feel free to call me James.

[Kishkumen]

This is where you're completely wrong.

No one you mention is trying to take John's place as the leading voice of ex-Mormonism. To the contrary. Other than steering tax-exempt donations out of John's dirty hands, I don't care a whit about ex-Mormonism. I don't care about Mormonism anymore at all.

Speaking truth to power is the best summation I have heard here. John abuses people, systems and power. And he gets away with it for two reasons: 1) Because people like his content, especially white male ex-Mormons who are highly trained in defending their spiritual leaders and 2) There's no other platform out there that has as big of a reach within ex-Mormonism that John hasn't already dominated, so any negative news about him is going to inevitably be drowned out.

I put in some time and effort last spring to the complaints. Then I forgot about it except for the couple of phone interviews I had with the Trib. It came back up this weekend cause the stories were published. I'll post on the subject for a day or two until the story dies down again and then I'll go back to not giving a hoot about Mormonism in all its forms.

Kate Kelly occasionally tweets about Mormonism/ex-Mormonism but mostly is focused on her work with the ERA. I have no idea what Rosebud is up to but I know she has no desire to do anything public in the ex-Mormon arena.

None of us are trying to run yet another ex-Mormon podcast. Good lord, no one needs another one of those. None of us are trying to get all up in the ex-Mormon space. None of us care that much about it.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Sure, Sparky. I believe that you have a savior complex and an axe to grind re:JD, and that KK and Rosebud are most definitely out for revenge and/or notoriety. You can tell yourself whatever facilitates your feel goods and a decent night’s sleep, but hundreds of your posts on this forum and others say much more than your silly denials ever will.