Interpreter Publishes Bokovoy Article 9 Years Later...Without His Permission

[The Stig]

In an interesting development today, our friend David Bokovoy took to his personal Facebook account today to set the record straight regarding the re-publication of an article he wrote for publication in a book assembled to create a book on Mormon Studies in remembrance of Matt Brown in 2012. Said article is linked here:

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... -of-jacob/

According to David - "The Interpreter journal has just released a new article I wrote over a decade ago, and that I presented in a conference back in 2012. I simply wanted folks to know that this was done without my permission. I was not consulted on the possibility of taking the essay and presenting it in the new volume. For the record, I disagree with the decision, but I am not at all angry or upset. I honestly do not care. We're moving our laptops into the prison for our students, my band has three shows this weekend, I've got a big 50th birthday bash coming up, and I'm healthier spiritually, physically, and emotionally at this moment than I have ever been in my adult life. So life is so good. Just didn't want anyone to be confused as to what happened. One Love."

So, the natural question - Why not just ask for permission? Was this a little jab at Bokovoy for his 'fall from grace?'

[dastardly stem]

Not feeling at all concerned about the quality of Bokovoy's piece, it is a good thing in a general sense that Interpreter published it. It's a nice wholesome piece that basically suggests there is reason to think Jacob in the Book of Mormon actually had Israelite experience or ties. Not a bad hypothesis and if the Interpreter is seriously interested in providing something interesting and convincing for Mormon and non-Mormon readers, they'd do more of this.

But alas, it's too bad Bokovoy is being too nice here in a sense. Does he disagree with the publication because he disagrees they did it without permission or because he no longer supports his arguments? Or both?

I admit and this is meant as no slight to David, but his continued effort to express his nonchalance towards Mormonism and Mormon apologetics feels a little insecure when he quickly follows it up with updates on how well he's doing. I do hope he's doing well, and believe him when he says so. Perhaps its more a matter of him still having relationships from his past and really feels the need to clarify for everyone. I can, for instance, imagine he'd get some questions and comments that a new article he authored was published by Interpreter. Might as well clear that up. If so, my sneaking suspicion is nothing more than my own cynicism rearing it's ugly head yet again.

Thanks for the notice. I wonder what it'd be like in David's shoes on this. I do wonder what kind of message they are trying to send to him.

[Doctor Scratch]

I don't think there can be any doubt that this was intended as a slight against him after his devastating take-down of Interpreter's peer review. It's as if they're saying, "Oh, yeah? You think our peer review sucks? Well how about this? If it sucks so bad, then why are you publishing with us?" The problem with that, as Bokovoy indicates, is that the essay is almost 10 years old, and he wasn't consulted in any way about it. That doesn't resemble any "peer review' that I've ever heard of. DCP is fundamentally a very vindictive person, and it has a "trickle down" effect in the organization, meaning that he probably ordered them to do this as a way of trying to exact revenge against Bokovoy.

[The Stig]

Not feeling at all concerned about the quality of Bokovoy's piece, it is a good thing in a general sense that Interpreter published it. It's a nice wholesome piece that basically suggests there is reason to think Jacob in the Book of Mormon actually had Israelite experience or ties. Not a bad hypothesis and if the Interpreter is seriously interested in providing something interesting and convincing for Mormon and non-Mormon readers, they'd do more of this.

But alas, it's too bad Bokovoy is being too nice here in a sense. Does he disagree with the publication because he disagrees they did it without permission or because he no longer supports his arguments? Or both?

I admit and this is meant as no slight to David, but his continued effort to express his nonchalance towards Mormonism and Mormon apologetics feels a little insecure when he quickly follows it up with updates on how well he's doing. I do hope he's doing well, and believe him when he says so. Perhaps its more a matter of him still having relationships from his past and really feels the need to clarify for everyone. I can, for instance, imagine he'd get some questions and comments that a new article he authored was published by Interpreter. Might as well clear that up. If so, my sneaking suspicion is nothing more than my own cynicism rearing it's ugly head yet again.

Thanks for the notice. I wonder what it'd be like in David's shoes on this. I do wonder what kind of message they are trying to send to him.

He is a professional who naturally would like some say in how his intellectual property gets used. On the other hand, he had something of a prominent role in Mormon Studies and Mormon Apologetics, and has now broken from that both professionally and personally. He probably feels somewhat compelled to point out that those things are in his past, not his future, when such things are put back out there for public consumption.

[dastardly stem]

I don't think there can be any doubt that this was intended as a slight against him after his devastating take-down of Interpreter's peer review. It's as if they're saying, "Oh, yeah? You think our peer review sucks? Well how about this? If it sucks so bad, then why are you publishing with us?" The problem with that, as Bokovoy indicates, is that the essay is almost 10 years old, and he wasn't consulted in any way about it. That doesn't resemble any "peer review' that I've ever heard of. DCP is fundamentally a very vindictive person, and it has a "trickle down" effect in the organization, meaning that he probably ordered them to do this as a way of trying to exact revenge against Bokovoy.

Oh yes, the integrity of the Interpreter could not be more compromised than is demonstrated by this move.

[IHAQ]

That seems really unprofessional by the folk at Interpreter.

[The Stig]

That seems really unprofessional by the folk at Interpreter.

Indeed. At the very best, that's what this action was.

[DrStakhanovite]

I wonder if the Interpreter has a reuse license in their contracts with authors, I'm assuming they do because their model seems to suggest they are diamond open access.

[Philo Sofee]

I don't think there can be any doubt that this was intended as a slight against him after his devastating take-down of Interpreter's peer review. It's as if they're saying, "Oh, yeah? You think our peer review sucks? Well how about this? If it sucks so bad, then why are you publishing with us?" The problem with that, as Bokovoy indicates, is that the essay is almost 10 years old, and he wasn't consulted in any way about it. That doesn't resemble any "peer review' that I've ever heard of. DCP is fundamentally a very vindictive person, and it has a "trickle down" effect in the organization, meaning that he probably ordered them to do this as a way of trying to exact revenge against Bokovoy.

I thought Peterson woke up and smelled the coffee and finally decided, after all these years of publishing idiots, to finally do something scholarly.

I entirely agree it was truly unprofessional to do it the way they did it, but it is no surprise. Apologists can't grasp what professionalism is.

[Lem]

...I entirely agree it was truly unprofessional to do it the way they did it, but it is no surprise. Apologists can't grasp what professionalism is.

Exactly. I don't quite know why, maybe it's the isolation? Or the feeling of superiority the lds church apparently gives them leaking over into every aspect of their lives? Who knows. It is an astonishing level of immaturity, shown over and over and over. It truly surprises me.