Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr Moore »

Yes, as I have reported before, Dr. Peterson and I reached a private agreement after the public "wager" failed. In that private agreement, details of which I've shared a few times in other threads, my commitment was to send a lesser, one time amount to Interpreter, in exchange for nothing but Dan's good word. He eagerly accepted, saying that "I keep promises." Therefore, you can understand why I am not backing down from vocally calling Daniel Peterson a liar who acted and continues to act in bad faith. Documentation of this contract is far from libelous. Engaging in a fund raising contract of this nature was not coerced upon Dan whatsoever. His utter and intentional failing to provide value for value received is, in my view, an impeachable offence. That he did so as a representative of BYU, using BYU's email server, should not be understated as he searches a convenient "out" from his own commitment to, literally, NOT say mean things about this forum.

Say what you will about the advisability of me making this deal -- it was my decision too, and I had my reasons -- but Dan made the covenant and since then he's pretended to be "trying" when the record shows he has only tried to be just as much an ass while giving lip service to good faith. Which is also known, among good people, as acting in bad faith.

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Doctor Scratch »

You are absolutely right, Dr. Moore. I wonder if the Mopologists have been privately laughing about this? E.g., "Ha ha ha! What a sucker! He actually thought we'd follow through! LOL! Now, let's go get us some Chik-fil-a!"
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Wow, look at this:
Louis Midgley wrote:In addition, Professor Peterson, back in October 2019, had me provide the list of those nine essays that constituted one of his more active blog posts. He did so precisely because he indicated that someone had mocked my scholarship on the Maori on your board. And this began a long series of clashes I subsequently had with the one who joined your board in August, who posts on your board as Dr. LOD, and elsewhere as Dr. Velho Burrinho, which means Little Old Donkey in Portuguese. You must be aware of all of this, since you watched, and approved, Dr. Scratch do a dress rehearsal for what took place on January 1-2, 2000 on your very own board, and then you also watched and approved, as I have demonstrated, all that rubbish that your own inmates posted on Gina Colvin's "Kiwi Mormon" Patheos blog.
(underlined emphasis added).

I see that DCP's email to you is dated October 22. So, that means that, right around the time that he happily pocketed your money (and is there any proof that it did actually go towards Interpreter, and not into Peterson's personal bank account?), he was busy egging Midgley on behind the scenes.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

User avatar
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 3345
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr Exiled »

Dr Moore wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:33 pm
Yes, as I have reported before, Dr. Peterson and I reached a private agreement after the public "wager" failed. In that private agreement, details of which I've shared a few times in other threads, my commitment was to send a lesser, one time amount to Interpreter, in exchange for nothing but Dan's good word. He eagerly accepted, saying that "I keep promises." Therefore, you can understand why I am not backing down from vocally calling Daniel Peterson a liar who acted and continues to act in bad faith. Documentation of this contract is far from libelous. Engaging in a fund raising contract of this nature was not coerced upon Dan whatsoever. His utter and intentional failing to provide value for value received is, in my view, an impeachable offence. That he did so as a representative of BYU, using BYU's email server, should not be understated as he searches a convenient "out" from his own commitment to, literally, NOT say mean things about this forum.

Say what you will about the advisability of me making this deal -- it was my decision too, and I had my reasons -- but Dan made the covenant and since then he's pretended to be "trying" when the record shows he has only tried to be just as much an ass while giving lip service to good faith. Which is also known, among good people, as acting in bad faith.
Incidentally, don't worry if Dan threatens a defamation lawsuit as truth is an absolute defense in Utah and pretty much everywhere else. Brehany v. Nordstrom, Inc., 812 P.2d 49 (Utah 1991)
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr Moore »

Hence why, in our emails, I observed at the time that I bore the all risk of Peterson making me look the fool for trusting him. He has.

But while I had hoped for a "good" outcome from all of this, at the very least I can say that I handed Daniel Peterson enough rope to hang himself -- clearly he is committed to showing the world that he absolutely cares more about trash talking his critics than he cares about keeping his word.

My only recourse, assuming his behavior doesn't change radically, is to bring his duplicity out into the light. I've posted nothing but factual information, verifiable by anyone with authority to access BYU's email servers.

The check fulfilling my obligation in our contract was ordered on 10/3/2019, mailed on 10/10/2019, made out to "Interpreter Foundation", at PO Box 970542, Orem, Utah 84097, for the purpose of "Wherever it is needed most." The check cleared on 10/23/2019. I assume it was deposited into an account bearing that name. The gift was made anonymously through a Schwab Charitable donor advised fund. This was the second donation I made last year to Interpreter, the first being requested on 9/11/2019 in fulfillment of my "apology challenge" to Peterson, who technically did apologize for calling me a liar.

It's all just such a shame. I think the ambition of Interpreter is noble, even if the scholarship at times warrants the criticism it receives. I still care about the academic debate surrounding Mormonism and I've heard there are some really wonderful people involved in the Interpreter project. I personally know two people who have authored papers in Interpreter, and while we disagree about plenty, I love those guys and think they are terrific human beings.

As I told Dan, it was my hope to use this transaction as a launching point for a longer relationship in which I would be a future donor to Interpreter. By his subsequent bad faith decisions, Dan tells the staff at Interpreter that he cares more about insulting his critics at MormonDiscussions.com than he cares about a sustained donor relationship.

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Dr Moore wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:32 pm
The check fulfilling my obligation in our contract was ordered on 10/3/2019, mailed on 10/10/2019, made out to "Interpreter Foundation", at PO Box 970542, Orem, Utah 84097, for the purpose of "Wherever it is needed most." The check cleared on 10/23/2019. I assume it was deposited into an account bearing that name. The gift was made anonymously through a Schwab Charitable donor advised fund. This was the second donation I made last year to Interpreter, the first being requested on 9/11/2019 in fulfillment of my "apology challenge" to Peterson, who technically did apologize for calling me a liar.
Thanks so much for filling in the details in such a concrete way, Dr. Moore. This really has been quite revelatory, IMO. And Peterson's email to you, which you quoted above, is also absolutely fascinating. Look at what he says:
DCP wrote:It seems that your promised donation to the Interpreter Foundation has arrived. (Precisely how long ago it arrived, I don’t know. It’s been a while since I’ve been to the P.O. box.)
Thank you!
So, basically, there is a P.O. box in Orem to which checks can be mailed. Who has the key to the P.O. box, though? Peterson? Is the idea here that they get so few mailed checks, that they only bother to go to the P.O. box once or twice a month? DCP says that he doesn't know "Precisely how long ago it arrived," though we can safely guess that it was sitting in the mailbox for around a week or so. Is Kent Flack, the Interpreter's Treasurer the one who holds the key to this mailbox? Or is it Jann E. Campbell, their person who oversees "Donor Relations"? (Maybe an email to Campbell is in order, Dr. Moore?)

I really can't get over how revealing this all has been--I daresay it's a "watershed moment" because of how downright blase DCP seems about all of this. He is the *President* of the Interpreter Foundation, and he's pissing away thousands of dollars in donations so that he can fling insults at MormonDiscussions.com? Is that why he feels so confident that he can get away with it--i.e., because he's the President? (And can he be *removed* as President if the Board of Trustees votes to do so? Or if others in the organization revolt?) I wonder if there is a case to be made that he should be "impeached" due to his bad-faith handling of donations.

Finally: I will note, once again, that no one has supplied any evidence whatsoever that the money actually went into Interpreter's coffers, and not the President's pocket.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr Moore »

In a brief follow up, someone flagged an ongoing comment exchange between Peterson, Kiwi57 and Moksha. I will address Dan directly here, on this development.
Daniel Peterson wrote: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4973455827
16 hours ago

I would very much like to see this happen.

Over at the Shades board, where every day begins afresh with a new and fervent declaration of war against me and all my works (and, lately, against Louis Midgley), my integrity is yet again being dragged through the mud because, despite having given my word that I would try to tamp down the expressions of indignation against that board here in the comments section of Sic et Non, I haven't succeeded in doing so.

I've come to regard the continued participation here of certain regular posters from that board, and their continued representation here of themes and complaints typical of that board (but irrelevant to my actual blog entries), as the principal factor in keeping things here stirred up on the subject. In that light, until I saw the proposal above I had decided a few hours ago simply to ban them all for a period of at least one week and perhaps two weeks. The hypothesis to be tested was just this: I expect rather confidently that, if they were not posting here, mention of their message board in these comments would be sharply reduced if not altogether eliminated. (Derogatory mention of me, this blog, the Interpreter Foundation, Louis Midgley, the Witnesses film project, and etc., will, of course, remain a major staple of the daily diet over there, but that evidently seems completely wholesome and salutary, even necessary, to the folks who participate on the Shades board.)

Anyway, I will watch for a while to see how this experiment goes. I wish it well.
Now, if Dan is merely taking thought to introduce an intermediate step, like a short term civility experiment to preserve maximum liberty at Sic et Non, while also encouraging the additional benefit of improved person-to-person tone at Sic et Non, then I applaud that move. I wish him well with that. Seriously.

Dan's additional idea/threat to ban perceived agitators for 1-2 weeks after a warning should be taken at face value, and I hope he succeeds wildly by taking this much-needed moderation step. If that's "what it takes" to succeed in fulfilling our deal, painful as it may be, he should be encouraged in that direction. Personally I prefer his model of a 1-2 week "timeout" vs a perma ban, because his blog (Sic et Non) is still one of the few places where folks talk openly about controversial ideas about Mormonism.

I worry, however, about the bolded text (my emphasis) above, which suggests a possible "out" being established to avoid taking responsibility for past and future bad faith on fulfilling our contracted agreement. That "out" being the age old finger pointing excuse -- "I know I'm not supposed to hit, but he hit me first!"

Shades, Moksha, LOD, Exiled and anyone else who tread over to Sic et Non represent NO ONE BUT THEMSELVES. None of those people brings up the MormonDiscussions.com forum in their comments, EVER. None of them represents anyone but his or her self. He/she may make certain comments that agitate Dan or his loyal board members -- heck, maybe intentionally (I don't know, I've never asked any of them about their motives). What we do know is that it is ALWAYS Dan, Louis or Kiwi57 who bring up MormonDiscussions.com, and that has remained a daily default response. Like some kind of umbrella insult to push the unwanted interlocutor away. And that would be perfectly fine, except for one thing: delivering that umbrella MormonDiscussions.com insult is THE ONE AND ONLY THING DAN PETERSON PROMISED NOT TO DO when he agreed to our Interpreter fund raising settlement agreement.

So to be perfectly clear: no, overlapping users of Sic et Non and MormonDiscussions.com are NOT the "principal factor in keeping things here stirred up on the subject." The "principal factor" for Dan's failure to "tamp down expressions of indignation against [MormonDiscussions.com]" is that Dan and his friends CHOOSE to respond to individual comments at Sic et Non with blanket insults aimed at this forum, rather than addressing those people as individuals.

Dan: engage, ban, ignore -- that's entirely your call. Defend at all costs when someone attacks you directly -- per our many long emails, that is all FAIR GAME in our contract. As I recall, you reserved the right to directly address an INDIVIDUAL when defending yourself against specific libel or slander. Go for it! But for the sake of your good name, please do "whatever it takes" to fulfill your side of our agreement.

Dan, if you cannot or will not do that, kindly and promptly say so. Upon seeing your concession, I will happily name a worthy charitable cause to which you and your colleagues at the Interpreter Foundation may remit the entirety of my October 2019 Interpreter donation, thus relieving you of any future burden in our agreed upon deal.

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Boy, they weren't able to hold it in for even 24 hours. Midgley posted this less than 10 minutes ago:
Louis Midgley wrote:Without any desire at all to summon anyone from the Dark Side, I just noticed that Dr. Shades never did respond to my explanation above. So I am still wondering why Dr. Shades wanted me to provide him with access to what I have published on the faith of Maori Latter-day Saints. And what exactly he makes of the opinions set out by Dr. LOD on his own board, and by the same one who posts as Dr. Velho Burrinho elsewhere.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10189
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Lemmie »

Dup

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10189
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Lemmie »

This is too funny. Along with Midgley, Kiwi just cannot stifle the urge to insult. The only thing left for him is a passive aggressive taunt, hoping to draw out someone who disagrees with him, apparently so he can invoke the “they hit me first!” middle-schooler defense. Here he is, quoting Midgley from before Peterson’s moratorium:


Avatar
Kiwi57 Louis Midgley • 14 minutes ago

ILM: “ I met and immediately befriended Dr. Nathan McCluskey, who is Gina Colvin's husband, and also Dr. Melanie Riwai-Couch, in Christchurch in February, when I was not stalking anyone.“


Well, of course you weren't. It goes without saying. And after all, nobody says you were.

http://disq.us/p/2a9qgq2

User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 3971
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

Dan,

The Interpreter needs to send back Dr. Moore's contribution ASAP. Do the honest thing for once.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014

User avatar
Gadianton
Hermit
Posts: 9679
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Gadianton »

Dr. Moore wrote:Shades, Moksha, LOD, Exiled and anyone else who tread over to Sic et Non represent NO ONE BUT THEMSELVES. None of those people brings up the MormonDiscussions.com forum in their comments, EVER.
I think this is true, and it's partly because our posters know they are at higher risk of being banned should they do so, but I would just like to encourage any of the above to bring up this board if they wish do so. The payment is to interpreter, not this board, and nobody should feel any obligation whatsoever to help them keep their commitments. I'm not saying there's an obligation to derail their commitments, but that there's no obligation either way. And so if a poster from here is neutral, feel free to be neutral. Nurturing? Feel free to be nurturing. Adversarial? Feel free to be adversarial if that is what you wish to do.
FARMS refuted:

"...supporters of Billy Meier still point to the very clear photos of Pleiadian beam ships flying over his farm. They argue that for the photos to be fakes, we have to believe that a one-armed man who had no knowledge of Photoshop or other digital photography programs could have made such realistic photos and films..." -- D. R. Prothero

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr Moore »

Thank you Dean Robbers, for pointing out the obvious potential implication of my wording.

Absolutely, I did not mean to imply any obligation, condition, or special request for participants of this forum to keep its existence or content hush-hush while interacting with forum guests at Sic et Non. My intent was merely to point out that each of those individuals appears to have been careful not to incorporate references to MormonDiscussions.com in their comments at Sic et Non in the past. It was an assertion of fact, which I think is correct, but I could very well be mistaken. Dr Shades in particular, appears to have avoided referencing MormonDiscussions.com unless someone else at Sic et Non brings it up first. Should any of that change, however, it would not alter the simple terms of my agreement with Dr. Peterson in any way. And I am under no obligation to encourage or otherwise entice any specific behavior by members of this forum, present or future.

User avatar
Gadianton
Hermit
Posts: 9679
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Gadianton »

Yes, I agree! Dr. Shades *poofs* into existence over there precisely when he is summoned! Just like a genie.

And DCP, Kiwi, and Midge do an awful lot of summoning.
FARMS refuted:

"...supporters of Billy Meier still point to the very clear photos of Pleiadian beam ships flying over his farm. They argue that for the photos to be fakes, we have to believe that a one-armed man who had no knowledge of Photoshop or other digital photography programs could have made such realistic photos and films..." -- D. R. Prothero

User avatar
Dr LOD
Deacon
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:24 am

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr LOD »

Gadianton wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:05 pm
Dr. Moore wrote:Shades, Moksha, LOD, Exiled and anyone else who tread over to Sic et Non represent NO ONE BUT THEMSELVES. None of those people brings up the MormonDiscussions.com forum in their comments, EVER.
I think this is true, and it's partly because our posters know they are at higher risk of being banned should they do so, but I would just like to encourage any of the above to bring up this board if they wish do so. The payment is to interpreter, not this board, and nobody should feel any obligation whatsoever to help them keep their commitments. I'm not saying there's an obligation to derail their commitments, but that there's no obligation either way. And so if a poster from here is neutral, feel free to be neutral. Nurturing? Feel free to be nurturing. Adversarial? Feel free to be adversarial if that is what you wish to do.
You are correct, I discovered and joined this board months after, I had called out Professor Midgley on his pattern of racially insensitive remarks (starting with his Jewish remarks), as well as challenging the Lamanite narrative and DNA.

Later after seeing a unrelated quote posted here from his Maori articles, I looked into them. That is when questioned his cultural appropriation of the Maroi for his religious beliefs. He also equated Lamanites with mud, which being someone who he would identify as a Lamamanite I took exception to.

Professor Midgley is a product of his time and the system he bought into. It still does not excuse him.

Temp. Admin.
Sunbeam
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:50 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Temp. Admin. »

Gadianton wrote:Yes, I agree! Dr. Shades *poofs* into existence over there precisely when he is summoned! Just like a genie.

And DCP, Kiwi, and Midge do an awful lot of summoning.
Yes, and their actions amaze me to no end. If they dislike me and/or this board so much, why do they insist on thinking and writing about me/it so much??

User avatar
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 3345
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Dr Exiled »

Temp. Admin. wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 12:12 am
Gadianton wrote:Yes, I agree! Dr. Shades *poofs* into existence over there precisely when he is summoned! Just like a genie.

And DCP, Kiwi, and Midge do an awful lot of summoning.
Yes, and their actions amaze me to no end. If they dislike me and/or this board so much, why do they insist on thinking and writing about me/it so much??
There is too much truth over here. We call them out for what they are, whether it's the plagiarizing issue that seems to have subsided thanks to Lemmie, et al, or Midgley's boorish stalking spying behavior (I bet he has a file on many posters here, trying to doxx them if he can).
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21158
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

What’s weird is why aren’t they obsessed with r/exmormon? For example, the subreddit drops constant truth bombs like:

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... incidence/

That, to me, is much more damaging to the Mormon church’s mission and to Sic et Non’s vanity project than anything we do. Why the intense, unending focus on this board?

- Doc

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22018
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Peterson promises to ignore Mormon Discussions Board

Post by moksha »

I posted over at Sic et Non because I thought it would be fun. Stem told me years ago that I should give the MAD board another go. I didn't pursue that because who wants to be where you are not wanted. I've stayed at Sic et Non out of stubbornness after realizing I was very much unwanted. Kiwi has suggested that I am masochistic. I try to laugh off the constant attacks by Dr. Peterson's two lieutenants, they have made posting on that blog mighty unpleasant. Dr. Peterson has mentioned wanting to change things. Perhaps he will. Dr. Peterson has suggested they are in attack mode because of my association with the Shades board and that if I hung around and posted pleasing stuff they might eventually mellow out. I think there is much more to it than that. A culture of such attacks has been allowed to develop along with a sense of being victims. The lieutenants believe they need to make venomous cobra strikes as a means of protection. Those bitten think that Animal Services needs to be consulted over the matter of tranquilizer darts. Some with a powerful dosage, some with a geriatric dosage.

I enjoy talking with Mormons. They can be very kind people. There are some people on Sic et Non whom I assume are okay by virtue of not being insulting and some that appear to be those kind Mormon people whom I enjoy. Then there are those who have taken up the poison pen as their contribution to the faith.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

Post Reply