Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Meadowchik
Priest
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Meadowchik »

consiglieri wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:13 pm
Meadowchik wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 3:18 pm
Sorry, but odds are that the latter is disproportionately built into your audience.
I’ll take that as a compliment.
But, all things considered, it lessens the credibility of the episode, as does your personal connection with him. You don't seem to be a disinterested party here.

How much of a bump did you get after appearing on MS? What happens to your audience trajectory if MS becomes less popular?

Given these factors, I would think you would feel ethically obliged to be all the more circumspect about the production of the episode. To insure witnesses are well qualified and people who would be critical have a chance to weigh in if you are going to invite callers.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Kishkumen »

Meadowchik wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 3:18 pm
Sorry, but odds are that the latter is disproportionately built into your audience.
So this is a gender thing? You equate a picture of a group of guys with RFM's audience? I am confused about your point.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8981
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:27 pm
Meadowchik wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 3:18 pm
Sorry, but odds are that the latter is disproportionately built into your audience.
So this is a gender thing? You equate a picture of a group of guys with RFM's audience? I am confused about your point.
Yeah, I’m not tracking Meadowchik’s ‘thrust’ as it were. MC, can you just state unequivocally what you’re trying to say, because it feels muddled.

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9569
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Res Ipsa »

jpatterson wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:19 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 3:34 pm

Yeah, because obsessively trying destroy a person’s life over a 10-year old incident involving someone else is exactly like chatting on a message board. :roll:
I think you can do better than this rhetorical style of setting up ridiculous strawmen. It's lazy.
It’s not enough to just cry “straw man.” You need to explain why. You appear obsessed to me. Your goal is to knock out of Open Stories Foundation through shaming him about a10-year old incident that he was shamed over to begin with. You’re pushing information that is hurtful to his wife and Kids. You’re falsely accusing him of crimes because you don’t know “F” about tax laws. You’re talking at face value things that a troubled person who can’t let go, continuing to keep her from healing. So, explain to me why my description is a straw man.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Kishkumen »

Meadowchik wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:25 pm
But, all things considered, it lessens the credibility of the episode, as does your personal connection with him. You don't seem to be a disinterested party here.

How much of a bump did you get after appearing on MS? What happens to your audience trajectory if MS becomes less popular?

Given these factors, I would think you would feel ethically obliged to be all the more circumspect about the production of the episode. To insure witnesses are well qualified and people who would be critical have a chance to weigh in if you are going to invite callers.
Perhaps you don't understand. The episode was about presenting certain evidence that bears on the accusation Rosebud is making, and it is about giving former members of the Open Stories Foundation board an opportunity to tell their side of the story. It is not about providing a platform for the ideal peanut gallery to weigh in with their opinion regarding the case. Anyone who wants to listen to the episode and comment on it has an entire internet in which they can do so. I don't see that anyone loses out here because he didn't want a bunch of John Dehlin or Rosebud cult followers trying to frame the narrative in their own way before and during the episode.
Last edited by Kishkumen on Wed May 05, 2021 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9569
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Res Ipsa »

jpatterson wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:21 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:15 pm

It is when that is literally what JP is trying to do. Is John Dehlin sexually harassing women today?
Hard to tell. If he is we probably won't out about it for 10 years or so.
That’s a weaselly way of saying no. So you got nothing in that department.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
jpatterson
Area Authority
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:17 am

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by jpatterson »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:18 pm


Here is my question: Do you think John Dehlin has sufficient introspection to confront this possibility? Maybe he does. I sometimes feel like I underestimate him, but I usually tend to think he is not approaching life with that kind of reflective nature.
John absolutely has the skills, but I believe at the moment his head is too clouded with paranoia about the path he has chosen and its sustainability. John made an intentional decision many many years ago to make a living off agitating the church. At some point along the way I believe (based on personal conversations with him) that the prospect of doing that for the rest of his life seemed exhausting. I think getting his PhD was a way to create a stream of income quasi-related to his agitation where he could counsel people through faith crisis and provide the kind of resources he wishes he had when he was going through his own faith transition.

Along the way, he began to see how lucrative the agitating could be. Regardless of what you think about his scruples, he has managed to pull down over a half million dollars in personal income over the last 10 years through Mormon Stories. That's nothing to shake a stick at. I don't have any information on this, but I would venture to say his "coaching" business has not taken off like he hoped it would. His website currently says he's "on sabbatical" from coaching.

I think John is now worried that the only way to make it through retirement and help put his kids through college is by continuing to agitate the church in a way that drives clicks to his website and dollars to his foundation. He feels stuck and exhausted.

So I think all of that clouds any opportunity he might have for introspection.
Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:18 pm
I often wonder about this "faith in transition" community, if there is such a thing. People can get stuck in this transition, never actually moving on, and it could be that all of the materials John Dehlin produces have a tendency to keep people there while providing him a decent living wage. But do you think that he is the sort of diabolical philosopher type who would really get that? Or is he like most people who land on something, like, say, selling junk on the internet to people who have too much junk, and don't really work through the further ramifications of their actions?

I have long thought the latter, but I could be wrong.

There are many business models that are successful but ultimately harmful. One might argue that our entire civilization right now stands at the top of the entire mountain of such misbegotten and deleterious methods destroying people and the world in the name of wealth, diversion, foolishness, ignorance, and pleasure. I like this kind of argument. It is interesting and worthwhile. By all means let's work out what might be wrong with Dehlin's business model.
First, I appreciate your attempt to introduce nuance into this discussion. I admit it's something I have lacked over the last week.

On a whole, if I allow myself to go down the road of moral relativism you're traveling in your last paragraph, nothing ever gets done and existence has little meaning. So I'm not really interested in that.

So let's focus on your first paragraph.

Again, all credit to John. He identified a market (disaffected Mormons), identified a highly effective method of communication (podcasts before podcasts were cool) and then aligned it with a long-term business strategy (faith crisis coaching).

I know for a fact John mentioned to me many times that he is sick of spending time on his podcast arguing the truth claims of the church and arguing about apologists, etc etc and would really like to move the podcast on to topics entirely devoted to helping people move on in healthy ways from religion. I think, personally, that he wishes he could transition MSP into more of a catch-all resource for disaffected religious people.

But he has not been able to successfully make that transition. Every time he tries, his numbers plummet. He is hyper aware of what type of content drives donations, and he adjust his content decisions based on that. I know that he knows that controversial topics that generate lots of chatter result in more money in his pocket. And so he's stuck between doing what he thinks is most helpful for people and doing what will drive the most clicks. It's very similar to the dilemma the journalism industry has been facing since transitioning to digital platforms.

Do I think that is "diabolical"? I dunno, that seems like a loaded term that won't get us anywhere. I just believe that John ultimately is not doing what he knows is in the best interest of those in the midst of a faith crisis--help them move on.

I feel better when I don't come here and obsess over John Dehlin. But I have a hard time moving on. People generally feel better when they're not constantly sucked into post-Mormon drama. But John's content keeps them there. I don't think that's necessarily evil, but I'm not sure it's ethical, either.
Meadowchik
Priest
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Meadowchik »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:29 pm
Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:27 pm


So this is a gender thing? You equate a picture of a group of guys with RFM's audience? I am confused about your point.
Yeah, I’m not tracking Meadowchik’s ‘thrust’ as it were. MC, can you just state unequivocally what you’re trying to say, because it feels muddled.

- Doc
I thought it was pretty obvious and to the point. RFM and Dehlin appear to be buddies. And more to the point, Dehlin's MS audience likely feeds into RFM's audience.
jpatterson
Area Authority
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:17 am

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by jpatterson »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:29 pm

It’s not enough to just cry “straw man.” You need to explain why. You appear obsessed to me. Your goal is to knock out of Open Stories Foundation through shaming him about a10-year old incident that he was shamed over to begin with. You’re pushing information that is hurtful to his wife and Kids. You’re falsely accusing him of crimes because you don’t know “F” about tax laws. You’re talking at face value things that a troubled person who can’t let go, continuing to keep her from healing. So, explain to me why my description is a straw man.
It's not enough for you to just make stupid comparisons that no one has ever made, but there you go.

In terms of being obsessed, a cursory glance of this board, to me, suggests "you all" are obsessed with Dan Peterson and his ilk for example. That was my point. We all have our obsessions. You just don't like my obsession. And so now your new obsession is how much you don't like my obsession. You should move on.

I'm not taking anything about Rosebud's situation at "face value." I've been pretty clear I've examined a ton of evidence which is how I've arrived at my conclusion. I also have a personal history with John.Your problem is that you examine my involvement as some random message board poster just because I'm posting on some random message board. John lied to me, and to a lot of people and has never ever EVER taken public accountability for his actions. Quite the opposite, actually. You may be in the business of not caring when public figures prop themselves up as something they're not, but personally it really bugs me.

In terms of your tax law quip, I've spoken with several tax attorneys who confirm that what John has done does violate tax code, but at a level that is so low that the chances of anything ever being done about it are close to zero. If you know how to read between the lines of Open Stories Foundation's financial statements, balance sheets and 990s, you can easily see that somewhere in 2016/2017 someone finally convinced John he needed to get Open Stories Foundation's finances above board by FINALLY instituting an independent compensation committee to decide his salary. Because he was just winging it before.

So please tell me more about tax law.

What area of law are you in, anyway? You seem to get very defensive any time anyone without a law degree dare demonstrate any sort of understanding of the law. I'm curious why that is. Do you have some sort of feelings of inadequacy you've gotten a law degree to help cover up?
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

Post by Kishkumen »

Meadowchik wrote:
Wed May 05, 2021 4:50 pm
I thought it was pretty obvious and to the point. RFM and Dehlin appear to be buddies. And more to the point, Dehlin's MS audience likely feeds into RFM's audience.
I didn't see them holding hands in that picture. I saw a group of people, mostly guys, at the same event. If I see people playing on the same softball team, should I assume they are all buddies? Or that they play on the same softball team? I kinda know RFM, and my sense of him is that he is not so easily captured by other people's motives, crusades, and opinions. This may be one of the few things he would not disagree with me about to some degree, but I could be wrong.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Post Reply