You sure about that? Sometimes boss man don’t like it when a woman say no. Sometimes boss man sneak into a room and touch woman and she no like.
- Doc
Pretty sure in this case that the woman looking for an affair found a partner in the bossman seeking the same.
Please see my edit above, but yes, they both bear responsibility for their affair, but in different ways. Rosebud cheated on her husband, and was doe-eyed toward JD. He, however, as a leader, bore the primary burden of maintaining professionalism- and if she made the first move, then he could’ve fired her for cause (or he could’ve made a recommendation to the board to do so).
What would you do if boss (whatever gender) came into the room and touched you and you said no?
Well, out of the Freeze, Fight, or Fight reflexes I have I’d probably hit him. How about you?
A lot of people kind of freeze up and can only protest an unwanted violation of their body. Some can’t even do that, especially so if they believe their jobs are on the line. They don’t want to make waves.
- Doc
Edit: This goes back to what John Dehlin’s mindset was. Rosebud said he was titillated by her resistance and by the taboo of what he was doing. This is actually very in line with a predatory mindset - serial killers are often aroused by the danger and taboo of what they’re doing - not that I’m equating John Dehlin with one, just a similarity in advantaging himself of a dependent woman who needed a job and probably daydreamed of being a power couple with him.
This is why I go back to laying the onus of leadership, which includes responsibility and accountability, at his feet. If I’m going to fire anyone in this situation it’d be the leader first, because the damage from bad leadership is orders of magnitude greater than that of the subordinate.
Hmm... In the moment I think I'd panic. I am a people pleaser. I will undermine my own feelings and cry about it later but then I'd avoid that person and would consider speaking to someone about it. I wouldn't continue meeting up with them in private or continue trying to have a relationship. If I were already in a relationship and I felt uncomfortable I'd try to discuss it and if the person wasn't reasonable or it continued to happen, I'd consider that this person doesn't respect me and I'd consider not being with them. But that is what my mind would do. In reality, I would say I have been in situations where I should have made better choices.
Please see my edit above, but yes, they both bear responsibility for their affair, but in different ways. Rosebud cheated on her husband, and was doe-eyed toward John Dehlin. He, however, as a leader, bore the primary burden of maintaining professionalism- and if she made the first move, then he could’ve fired her for cause (or he could’ve made a recommendation to the board to do so).
- Doc
There is no doubt that anyone in a position of authority has an extra burden of responsibility to comport themselves in an ethical, safe, and above-reproach manner. Dehlin definitely failed there. I have seen many people fail at this in different ways, but this way is particularly damaging to an organization. I don't think you and I have ever substantially disagreed on the fact that Dehlin behaved unprofessionally when he had the greater responsibility to act professionally.
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
Unfortunately, I don't think we can trust what Rosebud has said. She lacks credibility. She has misrepresented the situation with Dehlin so many times that I don't know how you can trust what she says without any corroboration from another source.
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
What would you do if boss (whatever gender) came into the room and touched you and you said no?
Well, out of the Freeze, Fight, or Fight reflexes I have I’d probably hit him. How about you?
A lot of people kind of freeze up and can only protest an unwanted violation of their body. Some can’t even do that, especially so if they believe their jobs are on the line. They don’t want to make waves.
- Doc
Edit: This goes back to what JD’s mindset was. Rosebud said he was titillated by her resistance and by the taboo of what he was doing. This is actually very in line with a predatory mindset - serial killers are often aroused by the danger and taboo of what they’re doing - not that I’m equating JD with one, just a similarity in advantaging himself of a dependent woman who needed a job and probably daydreamed of being a power couple with him.
This is why I go back to laying the onus of leadership, which includes responsibility and accountability, at his feet. If I’m going to fire anyone in this situation it’d be the leader first, because the damage from bad leadership is orders of magnitude greater than that of the subordinate.
Unfortunately, I don't think we can trust what Rosebud has said. She lacks credibility. She has misrepresented the situation with Dehlin so many times that I don't know how you can trust what she says without any corroboration from another source.
I'll bet John regrets setting up a board of directors. What was the point of doing that? Why not just set up a limited liability corporation so he could run the Open Stories Foundation however he saw fit?
I'll bet John regrets setting up a board of directors. What was the point of doing that? Why not just set up a limited liability corporation so he could run the Open Stories Foundation however he saw fit?
JD’s accountants” wrote:because AZ law allows for a single-director entity whereas most states require a board of directors. John preferred to go without a board, since it would streamline the decision making process and the general administration of MoSto. When I realized that John would be the sole director, sole employee, and owner of much of the intellectual property of MoSto, however, I started pushing harder for a board of directors to reassure the IRS that MoSto wasn't merely a pass-through entity created solely to directly benefit John. Once we all agreed that MoSto needed a board of directors, incorporating in AZ instead of UT didn't make as much sense since MoSto has limited contact with AZ.
JD” wrote:If I can't direct the funds as I need them (to help pay my way through school), and if I got bogged down in board conflict - it would probably end me. My initial logic for creating the foundation was that folks would be willing to donate more if they got a tax deduction. That's about it. Am I missing something at this point?
I think what you might be missing is that the IRS refuses to grant non-profit status to organizations that earmark funds to be used by a specific person. You may remember the Mormon missionary cases, wherein the IRS refused to allow parents to set up a trust fund - or allow the Church to set aside specific funds - to pay for their children's missions.
If you are the sole director of the Mormon Stories organization and are drawing money from the organization to pay your way through school and not to fund the mission of Mormon Stories, then you're not going to qualify for non-profit status. In other words, you can't use Mormon Stories as a pass-through entity to fund your schooling and pay your expenses. You may become an employee of Mormon Stories and draw a salary, but you can't use these funds for your personal use as a director of a non-profit organization.
I'll bet John regrets setting up a board of directors. What was the point of doing that? Why not just set up a limited liability corporation so he could run the Open Stories Foundation however he saw fit?
JD’s accountants” wrote:because AZ law allows for a single-director entity whereas most states require a board of directors. John preferred to go without a board, since it would streamline the decision making process and the general administration of MoSto. When I realized that John would be the sole director, sole employee, and owner of much of the intellectual property of MoSto, however, I started pushing harder for a board of directors to reassure the IRS that MoSto wasn't merely a pass-through entity created solely to directly benefit John. Once we all agreed that MoSto needed a board of directors, incorporating in AZ instead of UT didn't make as much sense since MoSto has limited contact with AZ.
I think what you might be missing is that the IRS refuses to grant non-profit status to organizations that earmark funds to be used by a specific person. You may remember the Mormon missionary cases, wherein the IRS refused to allow parents to set up a trust fund - or allow the Church to set aside specific funds - to pay for their children's missions.
If you are the sole director of the Mormon Stories organization and are drawing money from the organization to pay your way through school and not to fund the mission of Mormon Stories, then you're not going to qualify for non-profit status. In other words, you can't use Mormon Stories as a pass-through entity to fund your schooling and pay your expenses. You may become an employee of Mormon Stories and draw a salary, but you can't use these funds for your personal use as a director of a non-profit organization.
