Scratch, DCP, and the IRS

[_Rollo Tomasi]

You proved them wrong.

Yes, I did.

And I'm grateful for your assistance.

A real-world illustration is always helpful.

I am here to help ....

[_Jason Bourne]

Nice comeback

There is really little left to be said on this issue.

. by the way, it's "bald-faced liar."

Yes Rollo I know. Do you ever make a spelling mistake? Don't be condescending.

[_Jason Bourne]

You simply showed it was a possiblility, but, even then, I think it's a slim one because the Form 990 makes no connection between DCP and BYU (as it does with other board members who were paid). There simply is no evidence in the Form 990 that FARMS paid BYU anything for DCP's services as board chair. I know you very much want to believe DCP on this, but there is no objective evidence to support his claim. In the end, the Form 990 says what it says.

And in your ridiculous obstinate attitude and single minded attempt to smear Peterson, yes Rollo smear-something I thought you would not engage in like Scratch does-you ingnore the simple facts. The form DOEES NOT HAVE TO mane a connection between Peterson and BYU. In fact the instructions say it should not do so. So there is total and absolute objective support based on Dr. Peterson's testimony and the way the form is REQUIRED to present such payments.

And let me here make one other note. I am neither desperate nor do I want very much to believe Dr. Peterson. I just do happen to believe him. So stop saying what you know. You do not know. I have no vested interest in this, I am not Dr. Peterson's one man fan club (though I think he is decent person) I am not a huge fan of apologetic in general.

What I am a fan of is truth and what I am not a fan of is the unending smears and character assignations that Scratch, Gad and now to some extent you seem to take great joy in raining upon those who do LDS apologetics and especially Dr. Peterson. I think it shameful and will stand up for them whenever I see it appropriate as in this thread.

So there you have it.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

And in your ridiculous obstinate attitude and single minded attempt to smear Peterson ....

"Smear"? Come on, my comments have been based on a publicly-filed document. If anyone has "smeared" DCP, then it was FARMS.

... yes Rollo smear-something I thought you would not engage in like Scratch does-you ingnore the simple facts.

Simply not agreeing with DCP (who still refuses to look at the Form 990) is not a "smear." Nor is my refusing to buy in to your theory of a "smear."

The form DOEES NOT HAVE TO mane a connection between Peterson and BYU. In fact the instructions say it should not do so.

BUT, the Form 990 DOES connect BYU with nearly all the other board members who were paid. Curiously, it does not with DCP.

So there is total and absolute objective support based on Dr. Peterson's testimony and the way the form is REQUIRED to present such payments.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. DCP's "testimony" is not credible, in my opinion (particulary due to his refusal to even look at the Form 990). Moreover, the Form 990 connects BYU and other board members who received payment, but not DCP (the second largest recipient).

And let me here make one other note. I am neither desperate nor do I want very much to believe Dr. Peterson. I just do happen to believe him. So stop saying what you know. You do not know.

Nor do you "know." You have simply offered a possibility.

I have no vested interest in this, I am not Dr. Peterson's one man fan club (though I think he is decent person) I am not a huge fan of apologetic in general.

Coulda fooled me.

What I am a fan of is truth and what I am not a fan of is the unending smears and character assignations that Scratch, Gad and now to some extent you seem to take great joy in raining upon those who do LDS apologetics and especially Dr. Peterson.

But even you have admitted you don't know the truth of this matter, but have offered a possibility. Bottom line, there is no "smear" here, just discussion of a publicly filed document that DCP simply says is not true.

I think it shameful and will stand up for them whenever I see it appropriate as in this thread.

I have defended DCP's actions in the past, but I have also witnessed incidents involving DCP that I view as shameful and destroying his credibility.

[_Jason Bourne]

"Smear"? Come on, my comments have been based on a publicly-filed document. If anyone has "smeared" DCP, then it was FARMS.

What is the whole point and purpose of this thread of which you have been a main cheerleader on? Why did Scratch even start this thread?

Simply not agreeing with DCP (who still refuses to look at the Form 990) is not a "smear." Nor is my refusing to buy in to your theory of a "smear."

Again what is the point of this thread? Should we dig up some tax information on you or Scratch and post it here? Can you really substantiate those un-reimbursed employee business expenses Rollo? Hmmmmm? Oh but wait, we cannot post personal things about you because you are anonymous here as is Scratch.

BUT, the Form 990 DOES connect BYU with nearly all the other board members who were paid. Curiously, it does not with DCP.

So what?

Sorry, I'm not buying it. DCP's "testimony" is not credible, in my opinion (particulary due to his refusal to even look at the Form 990). Moreover, the Form 990 connects BYU and other board members who received payment, but not DCP (the second largest recipient).

So in other words you think he is lying.

Nor do you "know." You have simply offered a possibility.

The you do not know was in reference to you saying you know I am desperate to believe Dr Peterson. Of course I have said all along that my conclusion is based on Peterson's position that he did not get paid this amount.

Coulda fooled me.

Cute.

But even you have admitted you don't know the truth of this matter, but have offered a possibility. Bottom line, there is no "smear" here, just discussion of a publicly filed document that DCP simply says is not true.

The purpose of this thread is an attempt to embarrass or put our some dirt on Dr. Peterson plain and simple.

I have defended DCP's actions in the past, but I have also witnessed incidents involving DCP that I view as shameful and destroying his credibility

If you have I have never seen it.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

What is the whole point and purpose of this thread of which you have been a main cheerleader on? Why did Scratch even start this thread?

I only know my purpose on this thread.

Again what is the point of this thread? Should we dig up some tax information on you or Scratch and post it here? Can you really substantiate those un-reimbursed employee business expenses Rollo? Hmmmmm? Oh but wait, we cannot post personal things about you because you are anonymous here as is Scratch.

The Form 990 is publicly filed and available to all -- personal income tax forms are not. But I'm sure you know this, so this is a red herring. As for me personally, I never claim any expense I can't back up with a receipt or other document. That's just how I do it. If I'm not sure I can deduct something, then I don't. As for anonymity, which you and I both share here, the reason for it is obvious.

BUT, the Form 990 DOES connect BYU with nearly all the other board members who were paid. Curiously, it does not with DCP.

So what?

Given how FARMS chose to identify those who received payments for work on the board, and their connection to BYU (but not DCP), I think it means something.

So in other words you think he is lying.

I've always said I think he's mistaken. His continued refusal to look at the Form 990 doesn't help his cause any.

Then you do not know was in reference to you saying you know I am desperate to believe Dr Peterson. Of course I have said all along that my conclusion is based on Peterson's position that he did not get paid this amount.

My reference to "desperate" was based on what I preceived as your willingness to take what DCP claims at face value, despite what I read as the plain language in the Form 990. I apologize for mischaracterizing it as "desperate."

The purpose of this thread is an attempt to embarrass or put our some dirt on Dr. Peterson plain and simple.

I disagree. I believe this thread came from DCP's continued statements that he gets paid nothing for apologetics, whereas as the FARMS 1998 Form 990 reflects otherwise.

I have defended DCP's actions in the past, but I have also witnessed incidents involving DCP that I view as shameful and destroying his credibility

If you have I have never seen it.

I admit that it's not very often, but sometimes I make clear that barbs thrown DCP's way seem improper based on the facts as I understand them.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I've always said I think he's mistaken.

Not plausible, Mini-Scartch.

You think I'm lying. You're just trying to be politic for a change.

You've argued before that I'm a liar. Just be upfront about it this time, too.

You can't possibly imagine that an academic, on an academic's salary ten years ago, received an extra $20,000.00 in annual compensation without noticing it.

His continued refusal to look at the Form 990 doesn't help his cause any.

I've looked at it. I've said that I looked at it. I looked at it some time ago, when the Scartchmeister first opened this new and, in his mind, promising avenue of attack. I said, some time ago, that I looked at it. I've said since then that I looked at it. I found it puzzling. I'm not an accountant, though, and wondered whether you and Master Scartch were interpreting it correctly.

But I don't care what it says. I know for a fact -- by direct personal knowledge, not by inference or via research -- that I didn't receive an extra annual payment of $20,000.00 (on top of my regular salary) for serving as the chairman of the FARMS board.

If the IRS form says that I did, it's wrong.

Why would it be wrong? I have no idea.

But Jason Bourne argues that it says nothing of the kind. If he's right, it's not wrong.

In either case, I didn't receive an extra annual payment of $20,000.00 (on top of my regular salary) for serving as the chairman of the FARMS board.

And, incidentally, I've never claimed that I've never received any payment at all for apologetic writing and speaking. That's a straw man. I've consistently said that no part of my salary comes to me, or has ever come to me, because of apologetic writing and speaking. And that, fanatical Scartcholeptic efforts notwithstanding, is the simple truth. Have I occasionally, in an unusually lucrative year, received a small royalty check or author's fee? Yes. In the range, typically, of $50 or $100? Yes. I've said so many times.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I've always said I think he's mistaken.

Not plausible, [Rollo].

It's very plausible because it's the truth.

You think I'm lying.

I have no evidence you are lying; ergo, I believe you are mistaken.

You've argued before that I'm a liar.

True, but I believed I had evidence you were lying. I don't here.

You can't possibly imagine that an academic, on an academic's salary ten years ago, received an extra $20,000.00 in annual compensation without noticing it.

I don't know if it was "extra." Perhaps just FARMS paid you $20K, and the rest came from BYU.

I'm not an accountant, though, and wondered whether you and Master Scartch were interpreting it correctly.

The Form 990 says what it says.

But I don't care what it says. I know for a fact -- by direct personal knowledge, not by inference or via research -- that I didn't receive an extra annual payment of $20,000.00 (on top of my regular salary) for serving as the chairman of the FARMS board.

As I've said before, perhaps it wasn't "extra," but just FARMS paying you $20K (like the Form 990 says).

In either case, I didn't receive an extra annual payment of $20,000.00 (on top of my regular salary) for serving as the chairman of the FARMS board.

Again, it may not have been "extra."

And, incidentally, I've never claimed that I've never received any payment at all for apologetic writing and speaking. That's a straw man. I've consistently said that no part of my salary comes to me, or has ever come to me, because of apologetic writing and speaking. And that, fanatical Scartcholeptic efforts notwithstanding, is the simple truth. Have I occasionally, in an unusually lucrative year, received a small royalty check or author's fee? Yes. In the range, typically, of $50 or $100? Yes. I've said so many times.

It appears you did in fact get $20K from FARMS for your services as board chair, which most certainly involved apologetics.

[_Jersey Girl]

Rollo

It appears you did in fact get $20K from FARMS for your services as board chair, which most certainly involved apologetics.

What evidence do you have, in addition to the tax forms, that corroborates that "appearance"?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

What evidence do you have, in addition to the tax forms, that corroborates that "appearance"?

The evidence to which I was referring was the FARMS 1998 Form 990 (with Schedule A).