Did Allen Wyatt Get 'Demoted' at Interpreter?

[_Dr Exiled]

Can anyone imagine having Dr. P as a legal client? It would turn into a cya exercise as Dr. P continually refused to follow advice while angling to blame the his lawyer for his own obtuseness.

[_Dr Moore]

Just to be clear, what I am doing here is not "dragging Dan's name through the mud" as he likes say. He does a lot to blame shift, to the evil other person who is unfairly accusing Dan of something he didn't do. That is not this. What I am doing clearly and publicly noting, once again, that Dan Peterson has utterly failed to live up to his contracted commitment in a private fund raising contract for Interpreter. Period.

[_Lemmie]

So, Peterson’s banning moksha and tavs because.... he’s mad at dr. Moore?

Peterson > moksha. 2 hours ago

I'm afraid, Moksha, that I'm going to have to bid you adieu. I genuinely wish you well.
Your comments here, which (you surely have to admit) have mostly been devoted to chiding certain other commenters on this blog and to jabbing LDS "apologetics" and the beliefs and culture of the Latter-day Saints more generally, have inescapably been received in the context of the place on the Web from which you come. That has tainted them, and you. And it has provoked division, and evoked a spirit here that I heartily dislike.
Most recently, my integrity has come under attack because an evidently well-heeled participant on your message board made a substantial donation to the Interpreter Foundation some time back on the understanding that I would attempt to dampen the fires of hostility toward that message board on the part of its longstanding targets (who, by the way, continue to be victims of daily vituperation and defamation there). He mistakenly believes me to have reneged on that understanding, and publicly accuses me of dishonesty. I dislike being called dishonest.
I've previously shown the exit from Sic et Non to at least two other people from your message board, and I believe that doing so had a discernible salutary impact on the level of discourse here in Sic et Non's comments section.. Now I'm doing the same to you and to tavs/Charles.
I'm more sorry about your departure, I'll admit, than I am about that of tavs/Charles. But I regret both.
However, I believe that things will improve here in your absence, with this blog and your message board as strictly separated from one another as I can make them. My goal, as it is the donor's, is to reduce criticism, even mention, of your message board here to a bare minimum. (I ask the cooperation of commenters here to that end.)
Of course, under the indulgent eye of that one-time Interpreter donor, you -- and others, including the donor himself -- will still be entirely free to chide us, deride us, mock us, criticize us, misrepresent us, denounce us, and lament our wickedness back at your message board, where doing so is a principal daily focus. So it's not as if you'll be completely muzzled.
Again, I wish you well.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 5043269038

Wow Peterson reads this board pretty constantly and obsessively. Gives new meaning to the phrase:

“Peterson’s Obsession: Board.”

[_Dr Moore]

I did not trick or somehow fool Dan Peterson into making the arrangement. He eagerly accepted it from a selection of options.

My obligation was to make a donation to the Interpreter Foundation.
Dan's obligation was to effect a long-term behavior change at SeN, as per the terms of our previous failed $10,000 deal, by not blanket trash-talking MDB and moderating his comments section for the same.

That's it. Silly deal? Maybe, but that's irrelevant. I agreed to it and Dan agreed to it.

Also, per the above comment to Moksha, Dan seems to object with a complaint that implies unfairness. I'd like to clarify that for the record. Not only did Dan Peterson never ask for me to attempt a behavior coup at MDB (something I couldn't do if I wanted to), he explicitly told me that he expected no such thing would ever occur. Here is our exchange, word for word, in which I attempted to clarify expectations of our arrangement.

Black text = mine
Red text = Peterson's

Sept. 24, 2019

1) Do you believe that this board vs board decorum exercise — more civility and less contempt — has merit as a primary long-term objective?

Yes. Of course. I’m nothing remotely like the malignant monster that certain people at MDB have conjured up over the past fifteen years. Nor is the tone of my blog, as such, remotely like that of MDB.

2) Do you believe that with fewer personal attacks comes a richer and broader field of visitors looking to safely, yet openly, discuss and learn about the issues?

Probably.

3) Do you believe that many people look to tone and tenor, as much as to content, for solace when wrestling to understand the harder issues in Mormonism?

Likely.

4) Do you believe that your leadership by example can affect change by transforming the learning experience for people on both sides of these challenging -- and emotional -- debates?

Unfortunately, no. I tried to defend myself on MDB for several years. I finally left, quite a few years ago now. I was told that, if I went away, they would lose interest in me. I didn’t believe that, and it has proved completely false. The current rather frenzied attempts to scuttle our deal, paralleled by ongoing attacks and denigration directed at me, are precisely what I anticipated, and I don’t believe that they’ll stop. They’ve gone on for a decade and a half.

5) Do you believe many more people are watching what you do than are watching what happens at Shades' message boards?

Yes, it’s likely that there are. Happily.

See point 4. It seems Dan took my comment literally and answered literally, in terms that cannot be interpreted any other way than that he viewed this as a futile exercise vis a vis how certain individuals at MDB criticize/attack Dr. Peterson in the future. He expected no such thing. So why does he attempt to hold his part of our deal hostage over that? It's disingenuous in the extreme. Dan expected nothing at MDB to change, and yet he still made the deal with me -- eagerly. Now he's spent almost 9 months trying to wriggle his way out of his obligation by smuggling in a hypocrisy term, that somehow MDB has to change before he will change. NO, NO, AND NO, AND THAT WAS ENTIRELY THE POINT TO BEGIN WITH, DAN.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Dr. Peterson is trying to spin the situation to make it look like you, Dr. Moore, are forcing him to censor and/or ban people:

I regret the fact, tavs/Charles, that recent comments over at your message board are leading me to escort you to the door.

I don't regret it very much, I'll admit, but I hadn't really been planning on it. However, reading some lines from Dr. Moore convinced me that it would be advisable.

Best wishes.

That isn't the problem, though. The problem is his inability to keep from running his own mouth.

[_Dr Moore]

Dr. Peterson is trying to spin the situation to make it look like you, Dr. Moore, are forcing him to censor and/or ban people:

I'm under no illusion that Dan Peterson admires my version of good faith. Nor am I certain that he will comply, even with a few likely overdue ban hammers.

I have been open, patient and forthcoming about this affair. I'd hoped to keep our private terms private, but Dan has forced my hand by taking 9 months of leash and hanging himself with it. He has all but ignored his promise and that doesn't work for me. It never will.

If Dr. Peterson upholds his end of the deal, I will stop agitating about it. No victory laps, I'll just stop talking about it. Simple. If he doesn't, well it just escalates further and further, and who knows what happens when it ends up up on certain doorsteps. I don't want that. No one wins with that.

[_Dr Moore]

Doctor Scratch, once again, I have to apologize for railroading your thread. I think this is a second time, and it's bad forum courtesy on my part. I'll stop here and encourage a return to the thread's primary theme. Further posts about my deal with Dr. P will go on a different thread.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Funny how Christ didn’t get Dan to be more christlike, but mammon.

- Doc

[_Doctor Scratch]

Doctor Scratch, once again, I have to apologize for railroading your thread. I think this is a second time, and it's bad forum courtesy on my part. I'll stop here and encourage a return to the thread's primary theme. Further posts about my deal with Dr. P will go on a different thread.

No need to apologize, Dr. Moore, and yet it's funny you should mention the main subject of this thread, since there was a new, "Interpreter"-related post at "SeN." In the post, Jeff Lindsay (Wyatt's replacement?) is praised as being "irreplaceable," but there is no mention at all of Wyatt.

[_Gadianton]

I highly doubt "tavs" is a member of this forum.