Rollo Tomasi wrote:OR could it be that Dan doesn't want his bishop friend to be busted by his file leaders for inappropriately accessing the Church's leadership directory? Methinks the latter.
And Methinks the former...so there you have it.
As you wish ...
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Rollo Tomasi wrote:But has he said one way or the other whether his bishop friend violated the "conditions of use" by accessing the leadership directory on Dan's behalf? This seems like a no-brainer to me, but I'm curious if Dan has spoken about it.
Actually, yes, Dan has stated that he didn't feel his friend did anything wrong. He has also said that if he thought he was asking anything inappropriate, he would not have asked his friend the question.
Rollo wrote:But when Dan said this, was he speaking in the context of the Church's written "conditions of use" for accessing the directory? Or was it just some broad "he didn't do anything wrong" comment?
Kishkumen wrote:Looks to me that Daniel really stepped in it. I think Rollo has hit the nail on the head, and Rockslider's account of the discussion on Liz's board well confirms Rollo's view.
Well, at least he's being a friend to his Bishop buddy and strongly encouraging everyone that only he (Dan) be reported so that the authorities can then get the details from Dan and Dan only.
Well, what does one expect? Daniel's opinion about whether he did anything wrong, technically or otherwise, will remain the same regardless of the facts. I don't think I have ever seen him admit to having acted incorrectly or even imprudently. I place a very low value on the accuracy of his opinion that he has done nothing wrong.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
liz3564 wrote:It was in the context of conditions of use.
Thank you for that information. I would love for DCP to explain how he came to that conclusion, but, alas, it ain't gonna happen (well, at least not outside a disciplinary council).
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
RockSlider wrote:Well, at least he's being a friend to his Bishop buddy and strongly encouraging everyone that only he (Dan) be reported so that the authorities can then get the details from Dan and Dan only.
And how do those scenarios usually fall out in an LDS environment?
In any case, I don't think there was much sincerity in the suggestion that you turn him in. It was a passive way of guilting you out of doing it.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Wow, you guys are still bitching and moaning about this? Write a letter detailing the violations; send it to BYU, the honor code office, Pres Samuelson, the 1st Presidency, the GAs, and whoever else you think needs to know about it. It seems clear there was a violation, so report it and be done with it.
Kishkumen wrote:Well, what does one expect? Daniel's opinion about whether he did anything wrong, technically or otherwise, will remain the same regardless of the facts. I don't think I have ever seen him admit to having acted incorrectly or even imprudently. I place a very low value on the accuracy of his opinion that he has done nothing wrong.
Dan knows he screwed up on this public loose cannon annoucement. But of course Dan can never be wrong and will never publically let up. Unfortunately for Dan, this places a "low value" on anything that he has addimently maintained past, present or future.
suniluni2 wrote:Wow, you guys are still bitching and moaning about this? Write a letter detailing the violations; send it to BYU, the honor code office, Pres Samuelson, the 1st Presidency, the GAs, and whoever else you think needs to know about it. It seems clear there was a violation, so report it and be done with it.
Wow, you still bitchin' and moanin' about this discussion, suniluni2?
If you don't think we have a life, what does that say about yours?
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
suniluni2 wrote:Wow, you guys are still bitching and moaning about this? Write a letter detailing the violations; send it to BYU, the honor code office, Pres Samuelson, the 1st Presidency, the GAs, and whoever else you think needs to know about it. It seems clear there was a violation, so report it and be done with it.
No, this has nothing to do with BYU or anyone's employment, this is all about:
