Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[jpatterson]

So what you are saying is, technically, the organization was a non-profit controlled by a board of directors. It was not John's sole-proprietorship.

The organization was a non-profit comprised of a board of directors that almost never met and almost never voted officially on anything. That much is very clear. It wouldn't be accurate to say the board was controlling anything at the time of John's email to Rosebud.

John would be the one to ask about how really important decisions (like, say, his salary) got made if the board wasn't functioning, not me.

[Dr Moore]

So, to me, accountability would be John using the exact same platform he has continually used (his podcast) to make blanket denials for years, and come out and take accountability for the fact that he has made serious errors in judgement, not only in his professional behavior with Open Stories Foundation, but in seeking to cover up that behavior and blame the Church for trying to smear him.

You still have not been very specific, but let's go with this.

You're saying that you and Rosebud will walk away if John admits, via his podcast, to bad judgment?

Shut the front door. He's already done that.

What you seem to be REALLY asking for is for John to admit that Rosebud's mind reading ability about his state of mind is accurate. Which is a nonsensical demand.

[The Stig]

Just a little reminder about some advice that was offered to JD early on in this current chapter of drama: viewtopic.php?p=19855#p19855

[Dr Moore]

So, to me, accountability would be John using the exact same platform he has for years used (his podcast) to make blanket denials, and come out and take public accountability for the fact that he has made serious errors in judgement, not only in his professional behavior with Open Stories Foundation, but in seeking to cover up that behavior and blame the Church for trying to smear him.

Bold mine. WTF. How does it matter in the slightest way to you or Rosebud what John says about the church's efforts to delegitimize him? You're straining credulity with this particular demand, as it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Rosebud or you. You might as well sit at home and yell at the screen watching sports.

[Dr Moore]

So, to me, accountability would be John using the exact same platform he has for years used (his podcast) to make blanket denials, and come out and take public accountability for the fact that he has made serious errors in judgement, not only in his professional behavior with Open Stories Foundation, but in seeking to cover up that behavior and blame the Church for trying to smear him.

But hey, since you're trying to be specific, you know, JD is here on this board now.

Why don't you try writing out the specific language you'd like John to say. As in, write out word for word what would make Rosebud happy to hear John say on his podcast, so she can be at peace and walk away. I think everyone would love to know -- what are the words you want to hear from John's mouth?

[jpatterson]

You're saying that you and Rosebud will walk away if John admits, via his podcast, to bad judgment?

Shut the front door. He's already done that.

What you seem to be REALLY asking for is for John to admit that Rosebud's mind reading ability about his state of mind is accurate. Which is a nonsensical demand.

Uh. No. I'm not saying either of those things.

John has claimed, for example, that the allegations outlined in Kwaku's video are baseless lies that are nothing more than a smear campaign by the church.

So, in order to actually take accountability for saying something false like that, he would need to acknowledge that the accusations are not baseless and not made up by the Church. Now, the church may be taking advantage of the accusations, but that does not make them baseless.

I'm also not suggesting John has to accept Rosebud's version of events. But a full accountability for his actions and words would acknowledge that he entered into a relationship that, according to Open Stories Foundation's established sexual harassment policy, would have been considered at the very least frowned upon, if not actionable if the organization had such a policy in place at the time. This clears up any misconceptions he has created by claiming that he's never violated Open Stories Foundation's policy, which he's on the record as saying.

It's shocking to me that this needs to be spelled out so specifically, as if the concept of accountability and truth telling is so murky.

[jpatterson]

Bold mine. WTF. How does it matter in the slightest way to you or Rosebud what John says about the church's efforts to delegitimize him? You're straining credulity with this particular demand, as it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Rosebud or you. You might as well sit at home and yell at the screen watching sports.

You seem particularly triggered at the notion that a man in power should be held accountable for how he uses that power.

Why is that?

[Dr Moore]

You're saying that you and Rosebud will walk away if John admits, via his podcast, to bad judgment?

Shut the front door. He's already done that.

What you seem to be REALLY asking for is for John to admit that Rosebud's mind reading ability about his state of mind is accurate. Which is a nonsensical demand.

Uh. No. I'm not saying either of those things.

John has claimed, for example, that the allegations outlined in Kwaku's video are baseless lies that are nothing more than a smear campaign by the church.

So, in order to actually take accountability for saying something false like that, he would need to acknowledge that the accusations are not baseless and not made up by the Church. Now, the church may be taking advantage of the accusations, but that does not make them baseless.

I'm also not suggesting John has to accept Rosebud's version of events. But a full accountability for his actions and words would acknowledge that he entered into a relationship that, according to Open Stories Foundation's established sexual harassment policy, would have been considered at the very least frowned upon, if not actionable. This clears up any misconceptions he has created by claiming that he's never violated Open Stories Foundation's policy, which he's on the record as saying.

It's shocking to me that this needs to be spelled out so specifically, as if the concept of accountability and truth telling is so murky.

You're asking John to admit, publicly, to broad statements about which you are still not being specific.

JB, just write down the exact language you and Rosebud are looking to hear. Plant a flag in the ground. Otherwise you're like a plaintiff, who lost the case by the way, asking the defendant to confess guilt after the fact, without even going so far as to be precise about the allegation.

[Dr Moore]

Bold mine. WTF. How does it matter in the slightest way to you or Rosebud what John says about the church's efforts to delegitimize him? You're straining credulity with this particular demand, as it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Rosebud or you. You might as well sit at home and yell at the screen watching sports.

You seem particularly triggered at the notion that a man in power should be held accountable for how he uses that power.

Why is that?

Not in the least. You are bringing the church into a private matter between John and Rosebud. Why is that?

[jpatterson]

You seem particularly triggered at the notion that a man in power should be held accountable for how he uses that power.

Why is that?

Not in the least. You are bringing the church into a private matter between John and Rosebud. Why is that?

Because John brought it up.