Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[honorentheos]

I don't know. Does Rosebud saying in her forensic interview the board hired her as an employee say anything about the relationship?

One might wonder what kind of organization lacks organizational charts. Except, one doesn't here because it wasn't organizationally such that there was an operational hierarchy.

John's status and greater claim comes from his building the central Mormon Stories podcast up. Rosebud claims repeatedly in multiple places she built the communities. She even puts it on her resume.

[jpatterson]

I don't know. Does Rosebud saying in her forensic interview the board hired her as an employee say anything about the relationship?

I mean, I would think if someone could make the decision to hire someone and decide how much to pay them, that would mean they're in a position of authority. Would it not?

[honorentheos]

I don't know. Does Rosebud saying in her forensic interview the board hired her as an employee say anything about the relationship?

I mean, I would think if someone could make the decision to hire someone and decide how much to pay them, that would mean they're in a position of authority. Would it not?

Seems like. You know when that happened and who was CEO of the board at the time? According to Rosebud in the interview the offer was made because she was doing all the work making the conferences successful. Hard to argue it was due to John hiring his paramour if so. But I get the impression Rosebud was saying it wasn't John who hired her. It's almost the opposite, and given as evidence the board saw her value which resulted in John feeling threatened. But hey, you're her champion now so see what you can come up with.

[jpatterson]

I mean, I would think if someone could make the decision to hire someone and decide how much to pay them, that would mean they're in a position of authority. Would it not?

Seems like. You know when that happened and who was CEO of the board at the time? According to Rosebud in the interview the offer was made because she was doing all the work making the conferences successful. Hard to argue it was due to John hiring his paramour if so. But I get the impression Rosebud was saying it wasn't John who hired her. It's almost the opposite, and given as evidence the board saw her value which resulted in John feeling threatened. But hey, you're her champion now so see what you can come up with.

In John's own words, he had been lobbying to get Rosebud employed for several months, then finally made the decision to hire her and pay her $2,000 per month. He went to the board for formal approval, but it was little more than a rubber stamp (in fact, in the email chain you can see the board chair ask John for permission to put it to a vote...if that doesn't tell you something about John's position of authority over Open Stories Foundation I'm not sure what will).

John made the decision to hire her. John determined her salary. John entered into a quid pro quo agreement with her, and then John ultimately decided he wanted her gone. She was fired, he got a raise.

[Jersey Girl]

.

[Moksha]

She has been defaming Dehlin for years and yet demands anonymity in this activity? Where is Bought Yahoo to call balderdash on this anonymity?!

[Dwight]

John made the decision to hire her. John determined her salary. John entered into a quid pro quo agreement with her, and then John ultimately decided he wanted her gone. She was fired, he got a raise.

Correct me if I am wrong but the raise came long after the fact. There is no evidence that JD got her fired so he could get a raise. The raise came from another generation of board members that did it after looking at comparable salaries for the work he was doing. Again you throw in logical fallacies and imply things are connected when they are not. Your distaste for JD’s salary has no relevance and just shows yet again that your judgment of the situation must be looked at skeptically cause of your glaring obvious personal vendetta against John.

[honorentheos]

Seems like. You know when that happened and who was CEO of the board at the time? According to Rosebud in the interview the offer was made because she was doing all the work making the conferences successful. Hard to argue it was due to John hiring his paramour if so. But I get the impression Rosebud was saying it wasn't John who hired her. It's almost the opposite, and given as evidence the board saw her value which resulted in John feeling threatened. But hey, you're her champion now so see what you can come up with.

In John's own words, he had been lobbying to get Rosebud employed for several months, then finally made the decision to hire her and pay her $2,000 per month. He went to the board for formal approval, but it was little more than a rubber stamp (in fact, in the email chain you can see the board chair ask John for permission to put it to a vote...if that doesn't tell you something about John's position of authority over Open Stories Foundation I'm not sure what will).

So which is it? John petitioned the board to hire her? Or they asked his permission to put it to a vote?

According to Rosebud, the board hired her because she was doing all the work to make the conferences successful and they saw how valuable she was.

News flash for ya, buddy. None of the big corp organizational assumptions work here for a reason. They had an affair, it went bad, people got hurt, but it's not possible for it to be sexual harassment when they were consensually engaging in behaviors that were inappropriate but mutually engaging in a basically non-structured organization like a two-employee NFP.

Do you recall the incident in her interview where she describes the first time they met in a hotel room and he said they couldn't have sex? Where she agreed but said she needed some kind of physical affection from him? Why? Because she was in a bad marriage and saw in John a source for what she desired. He saw in her a source for what he desired. He was apparently conflicted, she wanted out of her marriage. Sorry, bro, but the facts are this wasn't her being groomed, her job wasn't given to her in a quid pro quo, she was a participant in carrying on the most stupid Mormon-y affair possible, and apparently believed the board should have favored her over John to the point she argued even the attempt at equal treatment that the board followed wasn't appropriate.

She asserts being so successful and essential to Open Stories Foundation that the board couldn't imagine Open Stories Foundation functioning without her in one statement, then turns around and argues the board favored John over her because he had all the power and influence.

Please. It was an affair. They were both idiots. But she wasn't mistreated by the board, nor was she sexually harassed.

John made the decision to hire her. John determined her salary. John entered into a quid pro quo agreement with her, and then John ultimately decided he wanted her gone. She was fired, he got a raise.

Way to make a closing argument, but you've watched too much TV. Champions gotta champ, though.

[jpatterson]

John made the decision to hire her. John determined her salary. John entered into a quid pro quo agreement with her, and then John ultimately decided he wanted her gone. She was fired, he got a raise.

Correct me if I am wrong but the raise came long after the fact. There is no evidence that John Dehlin got her fired so he could get a raise. The raise came from another generation of board members that did it after looking at comparable salaries for the work he was doing. Again you throw in logical fallacies and imply things are connected when they are not. Your distaste for John Dehlin’s salary has no relevance and just shows yet again that your judgment of the situation must be looked at skeptically cause of your glaring obvious personal vendetta against John.

Comparable salaries? John's salary in 2013 was 17% higher than the 90th percentile of executive salaries for non-profits of Open Stories Foundation's size at the time.

The raise came from Natasha and Dan Wotherspoon, the only other two board members who existed after the Rosebud fiasco. They were both getting paid by John, creating an inurement triangle in which they were all lining each other's pockets.

Do you have evidence that they performed a salary comp in 2013?

My disdain is for mismanagement of tax exempt donations. John's excessive salaries throughout the years are just one of the examples of such.

[jpatterson]

So which is it? John petitioned the board to hire her? Or they asked his permission to put it to a vote?

I trust you can read. I linked the email so you can do so for yourself.

John decided to hire her. Went to the board for the rubber stamp. He set her salary. Board chair got his okay to put it to a vote.