Jesse Pinkman wrote:Since Lemmie thinks my other post that asked this question was off topic ...<SNIP!>
Your post has been reported, as there is no legitimate reason that you need to make this request on a thread where I have repeatedly asked you to stay on topic. This is your fifth off-topic post on this page alone, and there is no reason for you to keep it up, other than because you want to troll, a la Tobin.
For the FOURTH time:
Lemmie, to JP, wrote:I invite you to respond to the facts of the case if you would like to comment further on this thread.
_________________
bumped once again to get thread past Jesse Pinkman's derails:
DrW wrote:Jesse,
Where I work, a supposed professional who behaved as DCP continues to, and whose work products were of the general quality of DCP's, would have been terminated by now. The ethics and culture of an organization are judged by the behavior and public image of its senior professionals and long term staff.
I can't imagine any successful professional organization that would tolerate the poor quality work DCP manages to produce on a near daily basis.
We have just finished the long and expensive process of terminating a senior executive in our company because his work products and behavior were negatively affecting the entire organization and alienating the clients and counter parties with who we do business. The reputation of our company was important enough to us and our shareholders that we ended up spending a lot of time and money to get rid of this guy.
Just as this guy's behavior and persona corroded the reputation of our company, DCP's poor professional behavior reflects badly on BYU, on the LDS Church, and on Deseret News - at a minimum. As described by Gerald Bradford in his now famous letter to DCP, there was a reason that DCP was removed from his post at FARMS in 2012.
Gerald Bradford wrote: The time has come for us to take the Review in a different direction. What we need to do to properly affect this change in the Review is to ask someone else, someone working in the mainstream of Mormon studies, who has a comparable vision to my own for what it can accomplish, to edit the publication.
DCP's behavior subsequent to that event demonstrated very clearly why removing him was the right decision for FARMS and the Church.
Back in 2012 the it was
ad hominem attacks. Today it's plagiarism.
In my opinion, and clearly in that of others on the board, the public image and reputations of the above named organizations that continue to hire, employ, or financially support DCP, and his public persona, are diminished by association for doing so. While granting that DCP probably retains a following within the rank and file of the Mormondom, the perceptions of the general public at large are what is important to the Church in the long run.
To get the thread back on track, I wanted to come back to this very important observation by DrW.
Gerald Bradford made additional observations at the time, in effect stating that the approach taken in the past was simply not professional and did not reflect well on the University.
I doubt he would brook any possibility that the approach he oversees now would be allowed to be tainted, repeatedly, with documented plagiarism.
Philo, could you please provide the link of where this topic is being discussed on MDDB?