Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[Dr Exiled]

Come back mormonstories, if you would be so kind, we have a few more questions for you.

Feel free, Rosebud, to chime in. Did you make the promise to "go away?"

[Analytics]

I would think that if John Dehlin was going crazy crazy and spreading lies that could bring down the organization, Rosebud and the rest of the board could have found a way to cut off his access, too.

How? He had all the login credentials.

It's a matter of corporate governance, not who has the login credentials. In that hypothetical, the board could fire JD from his position as Executive Director and demanded that he hand over the login credentials. If he refused, they could follow-up with legal action.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Analytics,

Kinda hard to do your job in the middle of a conference when your totes equal board member cuts your access to your tools to do your job. I don’t recall equals having that kind of power over one another, in any organization.

- Doc

Can you refresh me on the details of this incident? Did JD cut off Rosebud's access because she didn't "go away" per the quid pro quo promise, or did he cut her off because she was spreading lies about another MS employee and board member pressuring her to have sex with him?

I would think that if JD was going crazy crazy and spreading lies that could bring down the organization, Rosebud and the rest of the board could have found a way to cut off his access, too. The organization was a non-profit controlled by a board of directors. It was not John's sole-proprietorship.

From the dearjohndehlin website:

Dehlin wrote:

I am at the heart of this organization for better or for worse, just like Oprah is for hers. And I’m asking you to please not play games with me or with the board and try to operate against my will.”

How much power should we assume Dehlin within his organization if he literally warns Rosebud not to attempt to, “operate against my will.” At the risk of being distracted by how silly Dehlin sounds when he gets on a power trip of sufficient amplitude, he makes clear that his will is law in the Open Stories Foundation and should not be toyed with.

“Because it’s my organization at the end of the day. At least as it is now. Someday we may have a meaningfully participatory board. but we don’t have that now, and I don’t have the time to interact with such a board.”

If, as Dehlin claims, they don’t have “a meaningfully participatory board” that basically only leaves him as functional decision maker, making it difficult to escape the conclusion that anything done by the “Board” is effectively done by him with the legal aid, consent, and approval of a rubber stamp.

When Dehlin says, “I was the one who insisted on your being paid at all. And I was the one who pushed for your raises all summer. That was me.” he clearly asserts that he is functionally in control of her employment and pay. Thus whatever one might like to believe about whether Dehlin and Rosebud were equals at the Open Stories Foundation, it is clear that Dehlin certainly did not think so.

“We can’t work together and be former lovers. And I can’t be your lover any more. And there’s no where else in the organization for you to go. Because I’m the only employee.”

They could work together while they were lovers but not while they are former lovers according to Dehlin who, functionally at least, believes himself essentially the embodiment of the Open Stories Foundation. Because Dehlin is making the termination of her employment explicitly related to their past “verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature” it is clearly in keeping with Open Stories Foundation’s definition of sexual harassment.

The day after writing this email, he cut off her Mormon Stories computer infrastructure access while she was running a conference, in effect sabotaging her. When she asked him to send her a new password he responded:

“I didn’t delete your account because I was worried that you would steal or ruin. I’ve trusted you more than I’ve trusted
anyone in my life. I deleted it because you’re not listening to me.”

John Dehlin, email of 11 August, 2012.

- Doc

[Kukulkan]

“I didn’t delete your account because I was worried that you would steal or ruin. I’ve trusted you more than I’ve trusted
anyone in my life. I deleted it because you’re not listening to me.”

Hmm that seems to be in contradiction to what he said earlier. Not a good look.

3) I only locked Rosebud out of the groups after she kept making unwanted sexual advances toward me and then turned and claimed that I was sexually harassing her. That’s when I knew she was lying to me and the board and could wreak havoc in the communities. I would never have done this if Rosebud hadn’t made false and reckless claims of sexual harassment when she was the one at the end who was sexually harassing me, after I asked her to stop.

[Dr Exiled]

Can you refresh me on the details of this incident? Did John Dehlin cut off Rosebud's access because she didn't "go away" per the quid pro quo promise, or did he cut her off because she was spreading lies about another MS employee and board member pressuring her to have sex with him?

I would think that if John Dehlin was going crazy crazy and spreading lies that could bring down the organization, Rosebud and the rest of the board could have found a way to cut off his access, too. The organization was a non-profit controlled by a board of directors. It was not John's sole-proprietorship.

From the dearjohndehlin website:

Dehlin wrote:

I am at the heart of this organization for better or for worse, just like Oprah is for hers. And I’m asking you to please not play games with me or with the board and try to operate against my will.”

How much power should we assume Dehlin within his organization if he literally warns Rosebud not to attempt to, “operate against my will.” At the risk of being distracted by how silly Dehlin sounds when he gets on a power trip of sufficient amplitude, he makes clear that his will is law in the Open Stories Foundation and should not be toyed with.

“Because it’s my organization at the end of the day. At least as it is now. Someday we may have a meaningfully participatory board. but we don’t have that now, and I don’t have the time to interact with such a board.”

If, as Dehlin claims, they don’t have “a meaningfully participatory board” that basically only leaves him as functional decision maker, making it difficult to escape the conclusion that anything done by the “Board” is effectively done by him with the legal aid, consent, and approval of a rubber stamp.

When Dehlin says, “I was the one who insisted on your being paid at all. And I was the one who pushed for your raises all summer. That was me.” he clearly asserts that he is functionally in control of her employment and pay. Thus whatever one might like to believe about whether Dehlin and Rosebud were equals at the Open Stories Foundation, it is clear that Dehlin certainly did not think so.

“We can’t work together and be former lovers. And I can’t be your lover any more. And there’s no where else in the organization for you to go. Because I’m the only employee.”

They could work together while they were lovers but not while they are former lovers according to Dehlin who, functionally at least, believes himself essentially the embodiment of the Open Stories Foundation. Because Dehlin is making the termination of her employment explicitly related to their past “verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature” it is clearly in keeping with Open Stories Foundation’s definition of sexual harassment.

The day after writing this email, he cut off her Mormon Stories computer infrastructure access while she was running a conference, in effect sabotaging her. When she asked him to send her a new password he responded:

“I didn’t delete your account because I was worried that you would steal or ruin. I’ve trusted you more than I’ve trusted
anyone in my life. I deleted it because you’re not listening to me.”

John Dehlin, email of 11 August, 2012.

- Doc

I never read that email and that combined with the "go away" promise makes me think that Rosebud had a better case than I originally thought. Even so, forcing Rosebud out and paying her off was the practical solution. Yes, looks like Rosebud had a case but probably held out for too much severance.

[Jersey Girl]

2) Rosebud made multiple personal promises to me from the very start and throughout to “go away” if our relationship ever got to the point where it was hurting me or the Open Stories Foundation. This was a personal agreement we had made, which she agreed to prior to joining the board or coming on as an employee. I was only asking her to keep her promise. Frankly, I was stunned when she refused. I honestly thought I could trust her. But that was a personal plea.

In what context did she make these promises? Were the promises made under pressure from you and if not, how could we ever know differently? Because you say so? You thought you could trust the promises of someone who wasn't keeping the promises she made to her own husband and presumably the father of her own children?

As I valued Mormon Stories Podcast, and as she promised me from the start to leave if it ever got messy, I didn’t know what else to do to prevent her from ruining everything.

Prevent her from ruining everything? John you set this up yourself when you allowed the relationship to cross the threshold from private life to professional life. Where is the ownership on your part?

These are rookie mistakes you made both personally and professionally.

[Analytics]

From the dearjohndehlin website:

Dehlin wrote:

I am at the heart of this organization for better or for worse <snip>

Thanks.

Clarifying my original point, Rosebud's ability to have a successful career in the exmo conference production business isn't contingent upon the whims of JD granting her passwords to these accounts. Likewise, it isn't even contingent on her being employed by Open Stories Foundation. Rather, it is contingent on whether the by-donation exmo-conference production business is a viable business model, and whether she has the entrepreneurial skills to make it work. That is true whether she pursues this dream under the Open Stories Foundation banner or on her own.

Presuming it was a viable business model, that she had what it takes, and JD was out of line by cutting off her access when he did, the timing of his actions couldn't have been better. She had a captive audience of the best prospects for attending such conferences in the future. She could have announced to the attendees that Open Stories Foundation had decided, effective immediately, that it was no longer going to support these conferences, and that the remainder of the conference was the inaugural meeting of the new Open Wagons Foundation! She could have explained why that was such exciting and wonderful news to their community. She probably could have legally pocketed all the cash she had collected at that conference--after all, Open Stories Foundation had cut her off mid-conference! And she could have solicited donations for her new organization! She would be off and running without missing a beat.

And even if she failed to take advantage of that opportunity in this way, she could have created the OWF and made it happen anyway. The power isn't in who has the passwords to the Open Stories Foundation's Facebook page and bank account. The power is in who can inspire people to make donations.

[Dr Exiled]

2) Rosebud made multiple personal promises to me from the very start and throughout to “go away” if our relationship ever got to the point where it was hurting me or the Open Stories Foundation. This was a personal agreement we had made, which she agreed to prior to joining the board or coming on as an employee. I was only asking her to keep her promise. Frankly, I was stunned when she refused. I honestly thought I could trust her. But that was a personal plea.

In what context did she make these promises? Were the promises made under pressure from you and if not, how could we ever know differently? Because you say so? You thought you could trust the promises of someone who wasn't keeping the promises she made to her own husband and presumably the father of her own children?

As I valued Mormon Stories Podcast, and as she promised me from the start to leave if it ever got messy, I didn’t know what else to do to prevent her from ruining everything.

Prevent her from ruining everything? John you set this up yourself when you allowed the relationship to cross the threshold from private life to professional life. Where is the ownership on your part?

I would say it was a mistake for JD to come over here. The more I think about it, JD, the star, took advantage of an opportunity, using his star power. Rosebud may have overplayed her hand, but she had a case. Under the law, without a company policy, these types of relationships can happen and there is some question regarding it being consensual. Rosebud did pester JD for sex. But, there was definitely a power dynamic that clouds the consent issue. Both parties need to be subjected to vigorous cross examination after all the documents are in front of the lawyers. However, as these types of cases don't pay out that much, without the opportunity to have the loser pay attorney fees, a lawyer wouldn't have had the incentive to go after Open Stories Foundation and a severance with a max of perhaps $20,000.00 was all Rosebud could hope for. The law won't and wouldn't at that time force JD to close up shop, only to pay out on the claim.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

From the dearjohndehlin website:

And even if she failed to take advantage of that opportunity in this way, she could have created the OWF and made it happen anyway. The power isn't in who has the passwords to the Open Stories Foundation's Facebook page and bank account. The power is in who can inspire people to make donations.

Uh. The point was they weren't equals. Never were.

- Doc

[dastardly stem]

I would say it was a mistake for John Dehlin to come over here.

I would say so, yes. For over 150 pages there were people defending his case and doing a fairly good job at it. He came in and with a line or two eviscerated that position, it seems to me. I may be overstating it some, I suppose, since it appears there is some question persisting.

I imagined some sort of movie scene with a judge slamming his gavel while the court room erupts into some frenzy as John answered the couple of questions, all followed by the the prosecuting attorney yelling out "the witness has rights". thanks movies...at least you give me pictures to add to the imagination.