This board is now in serious jeopardy of losing its reputation as a Peterson-obsessed swamp.
But it's not too l ate to turn this thing around.
Can we do it?
[cue dramatic music]
Tune in again in 10 minutes or so to find out.
I have it on good authority that jpatterson has recently been hired by Daniel C. Peterson to publish the following columns in the Interpreter:
John Dehlin: Filthy Rotten Scoundrel or Just a Garden Variety Nazi?
Secret Names During the Nauvoo Era, The Early LDS Practice of Referring to Heavenly Mother as Rosebud
A History of the Oath of Vengeance in the LDS Temple Rituals, With a Plea to Reinstate the Practice Against the Open Stories Foundation
A Proposed Addenda to Michael Quinn's "The Mormon Hierarchy: Wealth and Corporate Power", The Dirty Rotten No Good Filthy Stinking Finances of the Open Stories Foundation
In a podcast episode from a few years ago, John and his finance guy (in response to these allegations) mentioned how they had just recently done a fair market evaluation of his salary, as if that was some new exercise they'd never done before. I'd be shocked if they did it for any of the years between 2010 and 2016 and I'd be shocked if they kept adequate records because...well...John. So that knocks out 2 and 3.
So... who cares? I mean really. For all you know, he was underpaid.
What's your goal, honestly? Do you want Dehlin's family bankrupted? Open Stories Foundation shut down? Margi to divorce out of emabarassment? Do you want Dehlin in jail? Deported? Executed? What is your actual goal?
You appear to be acting out a seriously pathetic campaign 9 years too late on behalf of a seriously unwell person. If you love or care for Rosebud, you should shut this all down and encourage sympathizers to do the same.
because obsessively trying destroy a person’s life over a 10-year old incident involving someone else is exactly like chatting on a message board
Framing something someone never said as their core argument is the definition of a strawman.
jpatterson wrote:
22) I believe John's actions, lies, manipulations and harassment make him uniquely unqualified to be talking about or holding himself up as an activist or leader on many of the issues he talks about within Open Stories Foundation properties and activities.
23) I believe that John's actions, character and lack of integrity make him uniquely unqualified to run a public charity that handles tax-exempt donations.
So, aren't you trying to publicly shaming him into giving up the project that has been his life for over 10 years? And aren't you doing it by dragging up a 10-year old affair. Not much straw there.
he/him we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.
This board is now in serious jeopardy of losing its reputation as a Peterson-obsessed swamp.
But it's not too l ate to turn this thing around.
Can we do it?
[cue dramatic music]
Tune in again in 10 minutes or so to find out.
I have it on good authority that jpatterson has recently been hired by Daniel C. Peterson to publish the following columns in the Interpreter:
John Dehlin: Filthy Rotten Scoundrel or Just a Garden Variety Nazi?
Secret Names During the Nauvoo Era, The Early LDS Practice of Referring to Heavenly Mother as Rosebud
A History of the Oath of Vengeance in the LDS Temple Rituals, With a Plea to Reinstate the Practice Against the Open Stories Foundation
A Proposed Addenda to Michael Quinn's "The Mormon Hierarchy: Wealth and Corporate Power", The Dirty Rotten No Good Filthy Stinking Finances of the Open Stories Foundation
Thank you!
I had almost lost my faith in [in]humanity.
Now, who says that philosophers are of no value in today's society?!?
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
As you know per your apartment contract, you are not allowed to sublease to anyone. We have conducted an investigation and concluded that JOHN DEHLIN is living rent free in your head...I mean apartment. Please evict him as soon as possible or we will have to pursue further action.
Please respond with acknowledgment you have recieved this email.
Sincerely,
Rosebud Apartments Management
"I advise all to go on to perfection and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness." -Joseph Smith
As you know per your apartment contract, you are not allowed to sublease to anyone. We have conducted an investigation and concluded that JOHN DEHLIN is living rent free in your head...I mean apartment. Please evict him as soon as possible or we will have to pursue further action.
Please respond with acknowledgment you have recieved this email.
So this feels a little past time, but I finished. This is rougher as I didn’t have a lot of time to go back. This is from when the interviewer finally interacts.
[2:18:39] New York City trip and first encounter
Interviewer asks about the long hug in New York. Specifically about how she knew that hug was about him hitting on her. Rosebud felt she was given special privileges. Now JD was eyeing her before the hug and might be hitting on her before the hug. JD also asked about her husband, and liking her photos on Facebook. He apparently made her a Facebook group admin and never explained it. She had volunteered to help, but felt like it was mysterious that John that ran the program so haphazardly did this with a specific purpose.
[2:22:48] First sexualized encounter in Salt Lake Aug 2011
They were naked and JD had an orgasm, but not inside of her. She doesn’t have a memory of all of it, what led to it, but she was on top of him and he got really sweaty.
Before that they went to the park cause she wasn’t going to let him come back to her hotel room, so he took her to the park to convince her. She can’t recall any words, but physical touch of him having his hand on her back.
[2:26:10] DC incident in a parked car
She remembers there was a survillence camera. Then there was a photo just after with JD sprawled out on a bench, and she knows this is cause he was horny and what had just happened before. Her memory is visual. “He had his hand in my vagina”. She enjoyed it a little, then pushed him away a little, and then enjoying it a little. She brought up the cameras and was concerned about them.
She admits she can’t make assumptions, but she is going to again going to make a conjecture that JD gets off on a woman who says no a lot. JD laughed about the cameras and thought they were no big deal.
[2:30:00] November LGBT conference
Rosebud consented that he come into her room. Interviewer asks what the “this is not quid pro quo” and what did that mean to Rosebud. Rosebud says that she felt it was JD letting her know if she let him in that she had to own that. There was a sexual encounter, but she doesn’t remember anything other than it was naked and not sexual intercourse.
[2:31:44] January Houston Conference
Rosebud gained her employee status before this. She says she had no supervisor, or maybe the board, but she was also on the board. She brings up that the 501c3 was to bypass IRS laws. (This has been discussed about how it probably isn’t illegal)
She focuses again on JD was using Open Stories Foundation as his private vehicle, but she wanted to completely legit 501c3 powerful board. JD’s idea is to run this really for-profit business and weak board. She empowered the board cause she sent them information about their voting rights back in the era of August 2011-sometime in the fall.
(Is JD flighty and incompetent at getting things done, cunning in his board or somewhere between. This is a pattern he is incompetent and gets in the way, but also very crafty depending on what paints Rosebud in the best light and JD in the worst)
(Again with the Open Stories Foundation structure and stuff is like this smokescreen. I think Open Stories Foundation would be better as some sort of independent organization that has a mission beyond Mormon Stories and JD, but it’s really not relevant to whether she was sexually harrassed or not.)
[2:34:11] Interviewer pulls it back to who organized the volunteers. Rosebud did that, she helped select board members, and she was working to put a legitimate board together, and learn what a 501c3 is.
[2:34:47] Interview: Do I understand you correctly this organization was JD, this board that you were a part of, and volunteers all over that [Rosebud] was in charge of to put this community together?
Rosebud: Yes
Interviewer: was there any other employees?
Rosebud: John goes through volunteers they grow dissaffected with him and then he bans them and moves on. Admits she went on a rant and lost the question.
[2:37:30] Interviewer wants to know if Rosebud saw him interact with any other employees or volunteers. Rosebud talks about at conferences he was working with volunteers, but nothing really. Rosebud starts to talk about a time he went up to a group of women and was really charasmatic, but trails off and says that when Rosebud was around JD only had eyes for her. She didn’t witness him hitting on other women in front of him. She says JD told her about a previous woman JD may have had an emotional affair with before, but nothing sexual, he disclosed this to her in summer 2011 before Rosebud had anything physical with JD. When that woman wanted to have sex he couldn’t. She can’t remember how it came up.
[2:40:50] January conference in Houston
She only really has images, she told him not to come in, and then she can only remember him being in the room with his hands under the sheets. Then another memory he is sitting up against the wall. She feels surprised in that memory. Then she remembers standing and hugging him, but she can’t actually say what order those images came in.
She can remember being under a bed. She has a feeling that she thinks John enjoys the risk of being caught.
[2:45:20] Interviewer has a note that she started to feel an ethical dilemma. Rosebud goes back and thinks the ethical dilemma always existed, but she started to have disturbing thoughts about the ethical dilemma.
[2:48:05] Salt Lake conference in June
The interviewer asks about how John was mean until Rosebud agreed to be sexual with him.
(At 1:54:20 Rosebud says “he had been really mean to me and then I was sexual with him”, I can’t find in my notes another place Rosebud discussed this, so this is how the interviewer knows about it.)
Then the interviewer pulls back and asks how did that sexualized contact develop from him being mean to you. Rosebud can’t remember what he might have said to elicit it or what Rosebud might have done to elicit it. She felt awful and it happened anyway.
(The interviewer’s wording seems to insert that Rosebud agreed to be sexual as though JD had sought it and she agreed, but Rosebud on her own said it in a way that she initiated it as a way to get him to be nice to her. May be splitting hairs but this is the only criticism I have of the way the interviewer worded something)
[2:51:20] the interviewer wants Rosebud to expand on the manipulations he said.
JD would go get other people to get changes he wanted. He would go get people to support his position. Then share those people’s criticism of her. Not that it has anything to do with anything with sex just bad employment behavior.
[2:54:10] the interviewer asks if any behavior or what stands out when she uses the word manipulation.
Rosebud responds shame. She believes JD was using her shame and ethical dilemmas against her. Rosebud is an honest person, she never thought she would do something so dishonest.
She states that John committed the crime of of recording her. (Though one party state it isn’t a crime, highly unethical yes.) Rosebud believes JD then confessed to it later as a means to control her. (He could have impulsively recirded it in the moment and then felt guilty and confessed which is part of repentance, I don’t know, maybe he was doing it just to manipulate her.)
She admits that she consented to the relationship, especially at the start. However she wasn’t doing the targeting, she was the target. Him saying he is a good family man during this time creates the ethical dilemma that he doesn’t care about. Rosebud is the only one that cares about the ethical dilemma.
(Rosebud seemingly doesn’t consider an affair as an unethical dilemma, but presenting yourself as a person that is not having an affair is. I wonder if her ex-husband would agree that she was upfront, or maybe it’s okay cause he is autistic and couldn’t tell, the lie of omission is fine?)
[2:56:55] interviewer wants to bring up the word retaliation.
Rosebud reported him, and even if she hadn’t he banned me and retaliated and did all these things your not supposed to do. Then she talks about shame. JD knew she would be so ashamed of this. From his perspective “he’s got to do a repentance”. Then he can get his Mormon repentance. And he was the man. He had this affair or whatever people are calling it and he can feel proud about cause he could get Rosebud to be sexual with him. Then go and sell these workshops cause he is back together with his wife and he has a happy marriage.
(She seems bitter he got back with his wife and rebuilt the relationship)
[2:58:45]
All of those things are shame and we could put the word retaliation. He’s trying to get me, he is trying to hurt me. He made a big deal about withdrawing from Sunstone. So everyone will go to their Facebook and they will all look at Rosebud at Sunstone. He is drawing attention to Rosebud to shame her. She just wanted to be professional and go on. He wanted her identity tied up in this.
[3:00:00] Rosebud forgot to say the results of the New Hampshire investigation. It had been on hold cause of her divorce but now she was glad someone was investigating it. They looked at it and JD did not have enough employees cause the contractors weren’t paid enough. Rosebud implies this was a diabolical plan that JD knew this and purposefully made sure he was outside their jurisdiction. (Amazing that a man who is flighty and unable to execute on ideas did research the NHHRC to figure out what they considered their jurisdiction.) She was going to lose so she may as well withdraw.
[3:01:06] She talks to her attorney about how to go forward. They were trying to negotiate a settlement. She was concerned about the publicity. JD gets to be proud of the affair getting Rosebud and getting back together with his wife and these conferences. Rosebud just gets shame, probably. She wants to be unbanned from Facebook groups, she doesn’t want JD to talk about the hit piece. These were silly things, and would reduce her public shame. It went no where. He has his attorney fees paid for by the donors and she doesn’t and he won’t even agree to pay her attorney fees of like $3,000, almost nothing to get the NDAs signed and at that point we’d both be signing NDAs. Her problem is that he wouldn’t sign the NDAs in 2012 so she would be safe. He has already bragged to the world about this. (If I recall she refused to sign her NDA cause she wasn’t sure if JD was signing his) Why should she sign a NDA now if he won’t cover her attorney fees? The negotiations are over silly little things (so is her shame important to reduce or not? Or is it the things are silly, but directly lead to her shame being reduced which isn’t silly?).
She filed a more detailed statement than her attorney would advise and withdrew her case at that point. She does not know where or if she has a copy of that document.
[3:04:34] she filed the document and at the same time went to a message board called Mormon discussions .com. She started posting about it. She was communicating to John. Her message to JD is that she was not going to be quiet, she won’t sign a NDA, she is not afraid as much anymore. She knew John reads the board, while the lawyers are negotiating and not getting anywhere. She knows she won’t get what she wants. She won’t get what she wanted which is to get confidentiality and being able to fix her life. JD wouldn’t even cover her attorney fees. It’s still all going on, but she doesn’t know all that is going on.
He went there and doxxed me. Rosebud chose this message board cause there is protection from using real names. This was one of her arguments with the Open Stories Foundation board from the beginning cause you can’t just use her name and make it her identity. Cause JD was going around publicizing this. She says he wasn’t using her name, he just said enough so those that know would know. So he could brag. She got the admins to strike her name, but by then people knew and posted to Twitter (here’s looking at you Kate Kelly, who left it up until a few days ago) so googling her name brought up the affair with JD. While she is trying to rebuild her life after her divorce.
People will praise JD and shame the woman. (I never praised him for this, seems like overwhelmingly the folks here don’t praise him for it, I don’t know anyone that does and would not associate with anyone that does).
[3:11:00] JD got sex that he wanted. He said it was just for Rosebud. He was manipulating her cause when is it just for the woman. If she could have gone away safely she would have, but she couldn’t so she stood up for herself. Rosebud feels JD wanted her to kill herself, but she doesn’t know if that is true. He hasn’t shown her compassion.
[3:12:57] he asked why she didn’t have an eating disorder. Rosebud isn’t vulnerable to that, but Rosebud knows the previous woman JD had an affair with and she has an eating disorder and Rosebud thinks JD’s wife has one. He knew she was vulnerable and a target, but he didn’t realize that Rosebud is a strong powerful woman that will standup for the little guy. If Rosebud could project she doesn’t think JD thought she would succeed with these conferences. Which created the situation we are in.
Dreadfully sad the whole thing. I don’t think anyone comes out of that looking good, and I really don’t understand why she went through with it. What will it accomplish? I feel like I am reading a diary about a crummy high school romance gone sour as I work through Dwight’s notes.
"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.”
[2:22:48] First sexualized encounter in Salt Lake Aug 2011
They were naked and JD had an orgasm, but not inside of her. She doesn’t have a memory of all of it, what led to it, but she was on top of him and he got really sweaty.
Before that they went to the park cause she wasn’t going to let him come back to her hotel room, so he took her to the park to convince her. She can’t recall any words, but physical touch of him having his hand on her back.
Suddenly I'm interested in this story now.
Seems like JD has a few sexual health concerns that he needs to get ironed out, firstly revelations that he couldn't get an erection. And now potentially premature ejaculation problems? He orgasmed without stimulation?
