Should the Dehlin/Rosebud drama be deleted?

[drumdude]

This is not about me. If it were, I wouldn’t be here. I have better things to do. A lot of them.

LOL

[I Have Questions]

This is not about me. If it were, I wouldn’t be here. I have better things to do. A lot of them.

LOL

Priceless.

[drumdude]

Rosebud, if this is such an important issue, why did you and Matt Long take down your podcasts about it?

Was it because Matt Long realized you were an insane person with zero credibility, and that being associated with you would damage his career?





https://youtu.be/kVvZ-L9ix8s

[consiglieri]

So SRA was a “red herring” in 2020 and now it’s Rosebud’s raison d’être?

[drumdude]

To be clear (since Rosebud is going to mischaracterize all of us again) I’m all for Rosebud and Matt Long exposing abuse. Investigate journalism is an important part of keeping that in the light.

I’m legitimately wondering why they took it down if it was so important.

[msnobody]

Also, since the place for some matters is in courts of law, it is worth pointing out (again) that what happens in courts of law is open for public discussion.

Am I not allowed to report on the Mormon church is seeking to get out of liability for the BSA sex abuse cases by giving a sum that isn’t enough money to the BSA trust fund? Or is the reasoning that I can’t talk about what’s in courts of law because they belong in courts of law?

Is the problem that my own name was brought up in a court of law so therefore I shouldn’t talk about it? (Some people make really dumb arguments.)

Also, right now, many cases (not unlike like my own) aren’t going to court in Utah because Utah’s Supreme Court ruled against Utah’s legislature on statutes of limitations (also protecting Nelson and his daughter) and any case taken to court will likely be dismissed with prejudice (meaning the case can’t be taken again in 10 years if the sentiment in Utah changes).

So why would I sue the church directly in Utah right now? So a judge can dismiss the case with prejudice and I lose all my rights?

And since the courts in Utah are silencing the cases by de-incentivizing people to file them because the cases will likely be dismissed with prejudice, does that also mean we shouldn’t talk about them on a message board?

Doesn’t that just help throw a rug over the top of everything?

Or is the reasoning circular and what it comes down to is that there are multiple pressures all working together to silence a problem? If so, is that not part of the problem itself? A part that needs to be pointed out and addressed? And therefore isn’t it worth someone seeking to point it out as address it?

Why doesn’t this belong on this board if the other things you discuss belong on this board? It is all about Utah and Mormonism and fights between different factions. That’s what this board is.

Why don’t you start your own website solely for the purpose of your topic? I think your audience is limited here. Then, you have control over it and can make it what you want it to be.

[Marcus]

I didn’t say Dehlin was in “cahoots” with child abusers. I use language carefully. I don’t have any idea what or who he is and isn’t in cahoots with.

I said that the timing of his podcasts discrediting organized child sexual abuse in the Mormon church aligned very will with the organized child sex abuse lawsuit filed against Nelson’s daughter, Brenda Miles, and that named Nelson as a possible future defendant for helping cover it up.
…

Shades, if it helps one way or the other with the decision, I’ve added a screenshot of the post referred to above, taken prior to any mod edit, to the relevant thread within the mod forum.

I'm glad you did. She's made variations on this serious accusation many times, so hopefully you got these also:

And there’s something else I want. I want to know what entity the Open Stories Foundation has an agreement with to not podcast about organized child sexual abuse, and, worse, to podcast in a way that supports the discrediting of victims....

And this one:

... As stated previously, what I do know is that Dehlin is podcasting to discredit victims and influence exMormons to likewise discredit them...

And this one:

... doing what I can to be part of what’s necessary to expose the dynamics of the role exMormonism plays in the coverup of organized child sexual abuse in the Mormon church...

Of course, in THIS thread she has backpeddled considerably:

...And I also stated that Kamp told me that Dehlin told her that he has an agreement with an “entity” to not allow victims of organized sexual abuse onto the podcast. Do I know that Dehlin actually told Kamp that? No. I am not an eye witness. So I state my witnesses accurately and allow others to make their own determinations.

...And none of this is also saying that Dehlin is in “cahoots” with child abusers.

I don’t have that information.

Except that in her megathread, noted in one of the quotes above, here's how she states things "accurately" about things she does not know:

...As stated previously, what I do know...

[Rosebud]

You know…. the whole finding and following prophets (like the Dehlins and the Nelsons) phenomenon is so different than being grounded in who one is as an individual, an individual with a sense-of-self who operates based on purpose and values and one’s own sense of place among a collective of intelligences moving forward towards consciousness development….

It’s so different.

Jarringly different.

Yet this difference (and everything it’s meant on this message board) is also fascinating, no?

[Rosebud]

Also, since the place for some matters is in courts of law, it is worth pointing out (again) that what happens in courts of law is open for public discussion.

Am I not allowed to report on the Mormon church is seeking to get out of liability for the BSA sex abuse cases by giving a sum that isn’t enough money to the BSA trust fund? Or is the reasoning that I can’t talk about what’s in courts of law because they belong in courts of law?

Is the problem that my own name was brought up in a court of law so therefore I shouldn’t talk about it? (Some people make really dumb arguments.)

Also, right now, many cases (not unlike like my own) aren’t going to court in Utah because Utah’s Supreme Court ruled against Utah’s legislature on statutes of limitations (also protecting Nelson and his daughter) and any case taken to court will likely be dismissed with prejudice (meaning the case can’t be taken again in 10 years if the sentiment in Utah changes).

So why would I sue the church directly in Utah right now? So a judge can dismiss the case with prejudice and I lose all my rights?

And since the courts in Utah are silencing the cases by de-incentivizing people to file them because the cases will likely be dismissed with prejudice, does that also mean we shouldn’t talk about them on a message board?

Doesn’t that just help throw a rug over the top of everything?

Or is the reasoning circular and what it comes down to is that there are multiple pressures all working together to silence a problem? If so, is that not part of the problem itself? A part that needs to be pointed out and addressed? And therefore isn’t it worth someone seeking to point it out as address it?

Why doesn’t this belong on this board if the other things you discuss belong on this board? It is all about Utah and Mormonism and fights between different factions. That’s what this board is.

Why don’t you start your own website solely for the purpose of your topic? I think your audience is limited here. Then, you have control over it and can make it what you want it to be.

Thanks for the idea. A volunteer did that for me once. It’s now redirected to the Wiki in my signature. I have a lot of projects going and don’t mind the dynamics here. And I’m after a public record more than a Mormon audience.

I think the bigger questions are for the board. What does this all mean for MD liability-wise considering Dehlin’s aggressive tendencies and his willingness to spend donor money to sue? A million dollars plus is a lot, if Kamp is reporting the numbers on the bankruptcy documents accurately.

Of course, I’d argue, what would be the point of him suing a message board that has no money? Would he go after individuals’ personal assets? I’m assuming that’s what he did with the 10 Does he sued alongside Kamp, but that’s unknown due to Faust’s order.

[Marcus]

You know…. the whole finding and following prophets (like the Dehlins and the Nelsons) phenomenon is so different than being grounded in who one is as an individual, an individual with a sense-of-self who operates based on purpose and values and one’s own sense of place among a collective of intelligences moving forward towards consciousness development….

It’s so different.

Jarringly different.

Yet this difference (and everything it’s meant on this message board) is also fascinating, no?

Also Rosebud...

... how this is being handled by leaders in the ex-Mo community...

... the ex-Mormon leaders...

She talks about these imaginary "ex-Mormon leaders" constantly. You'd think her inconsistencies would dawn on her, but they never doesn't seem to.