Hamblin’s Unmodulated Blog
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:05 am
As I noted in another thread, Bill Hamblin censored my post on his blog...
********************
Begin
********************
For you, Bill, Bradford isn’t “a bad person,” but he is “a less than competent administrator” (“a view shared,” you tell us, “by MANY other people”).
You don’t merely “disagree” with Bradford you “disagree RADICALLY.” Bradford’s inability to contain all leaks within the Maxwell Institute doesn’t merely evince “negligence” but “DISASTROUS negligence.” His behavior in firing Dan Peterson isn’t just “shameful” it’s “ABSOLUTELY shameful.” Bradford’s initiation of a new vision isn’t just “immoral” it’s “FUNDAMENTALLY immoral,” not just “wrong” but “FUNDAMENTALLY wrong.”
“[A] less than competent administrator” who exhibits “disastrous negligence” and engages in “fundamentally immoral” behavior sounds like “a bad person” to me.
At what point does the “classic-FARMS” guard recognize that such acrimonious rhetoric has contributed to their now-official marginalization?
********************
End
********************
But it appears that Hamblin has now tucked himself firmly into bed with Will Schryver...
********************
Begin
********************
William Schryver says:
June 23, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Ed,
I want people to know that my article that was censored by Jerry Bradford (The Interminable Roll — Determining the Original Length of the Scroll of Hor) was effectively co-authored by YOU, and when it is published somewhere in the near future, I would like to add your name to mine under the title. I know you have resisted this idea in the past, but the fact is that your contribution to the article was equivalent to that of Andrew Cook’s in the related article published (by Andrew Cook and Christopher Smith) in Dialogue in 2010.
As you well know, our article has been completed for almost two years now, and has only been kept from publication as a result of this ongoing struggle within the Maxwell Institute. As you also well know, our article contains not a single paragraph that could be construed as “ad hominem attacks”, but is, rather, a historical and scientific examination of the Joseph Smith Papyri, including precision measurements of the physical papyri themselves, conducted by professionals, while Professor Gee and I assisted and logged their measurements.
I have since learned that this important paper was censored by Dr. Bradford for reasons unrelated to the ostensible one which was ALSO revealed in an intentionally leaked report that originated from within the Maxwell Institute. This supposedly private editorial decision was secretly communicated to anti-Mormon elements at the Mormon Discussions message board, who published it as follows (in part):
“I have received a very brief note informing me that my case as laid out in this thread has been heard and William Schryver’s work will not be published by the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. I am sharing this information with permission, and … will not reveal my source …”
(viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18091)
It is quite apparent that Dr. Bradford and his cohorts suffer from no compunction to utilize underhanded methods to undermine their opponents and advance their agenda—which agenda, if publicly known, would no doubt arouse significant opposition from those whose discernment of the adversary’s modus operandi is much more refined than those whose decisions have now resulted in the recently accomplished putsch.
********************
End
********************
We’ve heard various thoughts on how employment termination (though note that Dan resigned and wasn’t fired) should be conducted in the “real world.” Having actually worked in that employment sector for decades, if I were Bill or Dan, I’d be updating my curriculum vitae right about now.
My best,
</brent>
http://mormonscripturestudies.com
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown
********************
Begin
********************
For you, Bill, Bradford isn’t “a bad person,” but he is “a less than competent administrator” (“a view shared,” you tell us, “by MANY other people”).
You don’t merely “disagree” with Bradford you “disagree RADICALLY.” Bradford’s inability to contain all leaks within the Maxwell Institute doesn’t merely evince “negligence” but “DISASTROUS negligence.” His behavior in firing Dan Peterson isn’t just “shameful” it’s “ABSOLUTELY shameful.” Bradford’s initiation of a new vision isn’t just “immoral” it’s “FUNDAMENTALLY immoral,” not just “wrong” but “FUNDAMENTALLY wrong.”
“[A] less than competent administrator” who exhibits “disastrous negligence” and engages in “fundamentally immoral” behavior sounds like “a bad person” to me.
At what point does the “classic-FARMS” guard recognize that such acrimonious rhetoric has contributed to their now-official marginalization?
********************
End
********************
But it appears that Hamblin has now tucked himself firmly into bed with Will Schryver...
********************
Begin
********************
William Schryver says:
June 23, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Ed,
I want people to know that my article that was censored by Jerry Bradford (The Interminable Roll — Determining the Original Length of the Scroll of Hor) was effectively co-authored by YOU, and when it is published somewhere in the near future, I would like to add your name to mine under the title. I know you have resisted this idea in the past, but the fact is that your contribution to the article was equivalent to that of Andrew Cook’s in the related article published (by Andrew Cook and Christopher Smith) in Dialogue in 2010.
As you well know, our article has been completed for almost two years now, and has only been kept from publication as a result of this ongoing struggle within the Maxwell Institute. As you also well know, our article contains not a single paragraph that could be construed as “ad hominem attacks”, but is, rather, a historical and scientific examination of the Joseph Smith Papyri, including precision measurements of the physical papyri themselves, conducted by professionals, while Professor Gee and I assisted and logged their measurements.
I have since learned that this important paper was censored by Dr. Bradford for reasons unrelated to the ostensible one which was ALSO revealed in an intentionally leaked report that originated from within the Maxwell Institute. This supposedly private editorial decision was secretly communicated to anti-Mormon elements at the Mormon Discussions message board, who published it as follows (in part):
“I have received a very brief note informing me that my case as laid out in this thread has been heard and William Schryver’s work will not be published by the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. I am sharing this information with permission, and … will not reveal my source …”
(viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18091)
It is quite apparent that Dr. Bradford and his cohorts suffer from no compunction to utilize underhanded methods to undermine their opponents and advance their agenda—which agenda, if publicly known, would no doubt arouse significant opposition from those whose discernment of the adversary’s modus operandi is much more refined than those whose decisions have now resulted in the recently accomplished putsch.
********************
End
********************
We’ve heard various thoughts on how employment termination (though note that Dan resigned and wasn’t fired) should be conducted in the “real world.” Having actually worked in that employment sector for decades, if I were Bill or Dan, I’d be updating my curriculum vitae right about now.
My best,
</brent>
http://mormonscripturestudies.com
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown