Open Stories Foundation---Dehlin, Money, and compensation

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

According to him, he does 1-2 hours of private counseling a week, if that.

Well I'll be.  Didn't realize that was the case.  Nevermind then.

[stemelbow]

7 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

The vagueness of accusations are bothersome to me, as well.

I thought it might be because I lacked interest, and hadn't paid enough attention to what was said, but now that it's mentioned, i'd agree.  It does seem rather vague, making the complaints seem, at least, somewhat convenient. 

[Meadowchik]

29 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I don't follow the guy - I feel I have better things to do with my time than follow someone trying to make money off other's "recovery" - I don't see much doubt that he is doing that - I personally don't identify with the movement at all. I went inactive, and wasn't crushed or experience any need for "recovery." I think most of what he is doing is served in more of a non-profit way with various internet boards - even like this one. The things dug up by Calm certainly don't help his case at all.

I am responding to you tho because there is no doubt that his interviews are pre-filtered or maybe even somewhat rehearsed. All people doing this kind of thing are going to do this. Lawyers do it too. I have no doubt John has a nice list of his "bullet-points" he has somehow gathered about a person which he wants to bring out in the interviews, which he checks off as the interview progresses. So I am sure this is what you are noticing. He is trying to get his guest to speak(more) about one of the bulletted points, so he may even seem kind of "lawyer-ish" rather than simply conducting a free-flowing interview. Let's just put it this way - he's no Johnny Carson.

I'd be surprised if comedian host Johnny Carson didn't practice lines for his interviews. The best part of Dehlin's content to me is how he gives a platform to messages and experiences relevant to leaving Mormonism. 

Some interviews are better than others. 

I remember a point with Trevor Haugen when I expected Dehlin to interject or finish Haugen's sentence, but he didn't and Haugen was able to describe his pain in more detail, which seemed to me to be a beneficial moment for Haugen.

Christine Jeppson Clarke, Kim Sandburg Turner, Lance and Nicki Miles, Alex Autry, Sandra Tanner, Brent Metcalf,  Michael Coe,...there are tons of amazing, moving, and inspiring stories.

 

[Tacenda]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I think when reading bullet points I feel as if the author thought too little of my ability to read actual sentences and pick out the important points on my own.  It's a bit like talking down to me

When I write with bullet points that is exactly what I am doing.  I am thinking "these guys won't get it unless I put it as directly as possible without nuance.  I have to give them a list."

Well maybe it just shows the importance of what the author is trying to point out so it won't get lost.

[stemelbow]

3 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

 

Christine Jeppson Clarke, Kim Sandburg Turner, Lance and Nicki Miles, Alex Autry, Sandra Tanner, Brent Metcalf,  Michael Coe,...there are tons of amazing, moving, and inspiring stories.

 

I very much agree with that.  And I can thank John for introducing me to the stories and some of the people. 

[Tacenda]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

John Larsen's opinion:

"2 main issues. John ossolates between courting ex-Mormons and Mormons. When he is courting ex-Mormons he tends to focus on tolerance of communication. When he is courting Mormons, he tends towards censorship of the more strident critical voices. They are then shown the door and asked not to return.

The second issue is that John has many great talents and is a wonderful guy in a lot of ways, but he strongly values loyality and will go after anyone he believes has crossed him or is not showing due support for his ideas. He has had many run ins with almost all of the ex-Mormon and liberal Mormon online communites.

Also, Dehlin's followers can be fairly zealotus and will go after folks too."

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/58213-dehlins-methodology/?do=findComment&comment=1209141042

 

I wouldn't compare John Larsen and John Dehlin. I've also listened to all of John Larsen's and I'm not sure John cares one way or the other what members like me are going through. He may have at one time, but he became pretty bitter none the less. And the quote above simply shows John trying to move in the middle of both worlds of which I relate well to.

[RevTestament]

4 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

I'd be surprised if comedian host Johnny Carson didn't practice lines for his interviews. The best part of Dehlin's content to me is how he gives a platform to messages and experiences relevant to leaving Mormonism. 

Some interviews are better than others. 

I remember a point with Trevor Haugen when I expected Dehlin to interject or finish Haugen's sentence, but he didn't and Haugen was able to describe his pain in more detail, which seemed to me to be a beneficial moment for Haugen.

Christine Jeppson Clarke, Kim Sandburg Turner, Lance and Nicki Miles, Alex Autry, Sandra Tanner, Brent Metcalf,  Michael Coe,...there are tons of amazing, moving, and inspiring stories.

 

If you want to contribute to his organization after hearing these allegations about his more personal dealings, hey, be my guest. It's a free world. 

[Meadowchik]

2 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

If you want to contribute to his organization after hearing these allegations about his more personal dealings, hey, be my guest. It's a free world. 

That wasn't the topic of my reply, but if ya wanna say that, well, ya did

[hope_for_things]

As a consumer of podcasts, and someone who's benefited from many of these Mormon Stories podcasts over the years, I have mixed feelings about what I see playing out.  

First, whenever money comes into play things can get messy.  As a strong believer of transparency, not just to satisfy legal requirements, but I would call for an ethic of transparency that attempts to give as open and honest of disclosure as will benefit the public good.   

One major problem I have with this recent news, and I'm trying to follow the conversation to see what transpires on this point.  Its with the way funds have been allocated.  As I listen to podcasts, I always assumed that if I donated to Mormon Matters or A Thoughtful Faith, that those funds would be specifically earmarked to those podcast hosts, and not just put into a larger fund that is allocated using a different method.  Some of the comments in the threads have talked about changing to a new per download method of payment, and thats fine to change it going forward, but that needs to be transparent and clear because I think most podcast consumers assumed that donations to any individual podcast would go to the hosts of those podcasts.  This has been my largest complaint and I'd like to see some better explanations about how this was handled and will be handled in the future.  

Lastly the principle that this continues to reinforce for me is that people are flawed and make mistakes.  I believe this is part of the human condition.  This is why I try to have charity towards flawed church leaders as well.  And in retrospect sometimes when I've been angry as I read history about Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, I really need to take a step back and remember that humans throughout history have made a lot of mistakes and are seriously flawed in many cases.  Current church leaders are not exempt from these same human failings and they are making mistakes today just like prior generations did.  

We should hold each other accountable and strive for better behavior at all times, and learn from our mistakes.  Dehlin needs to do this, and I hope that he will.  Current church leaders need to do this as well, and Oak's famous statement that the church won't apologize for mistakes, is an extremely unfortunate precedent to make for a flawed organization led by flawed individuals, but an organization that is trying to do good in the world.  I hope for better leadership that is humble enough to own up to mistakes, that seeks for greater transparency and that is constantly repenting and trying to improve itself.  

[Jeanne]

31 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

As a consumer of podcasts, and someone who's benefited from many of these Mormon Stories podcasts over the years, I have mixed feelings about what I see playing out.  

First, whenever money comes into play things can get messy.  As a strong believer of transparency, not just to satisfy legal requirements, but I would call for an ethic of transparency that attempts to give as open and honest of disclosure as will benefit the public good.   

One major problem I have with this recent news, and I'm trying to follow the conversation to see what transpires on this point.  Its with the way funds have been allocated.  As I listen to podcasts, I always assumed that if I donated to Mormon Matters or A Thoughtful Faith, that those funds would be specifically earmarked to those podcast hosts, and not just put into a larger fund that is allocated using a different method.  Some of the comments in the threads have talked about changing to a new per download method of payment, and thats fine to change it going forward, but that needs to be transparent and clear because I think most podcast consumers assumed that donations to any individual podcast would go to the hosts of those podcasts.  This has been my largest complaint and I'd like to see some better explanations about how this was handled and will be handled in the future.  

Lastly the principle that this continues to reinforce for me is that people are flawed and make mistakes.  I believe this is part of the human condition.  This is why I try to have charity towards flawed church leaders as well.  And in retrospect sometimes when I've been angry as I read history about Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, I really need to take a step back and remember that humans throughout history have made a lot of mistakes and are seriously flawed in many cases.  Current church leaders are not exempt from these same human failings and they are making mistakes today just like prior generations did.  

We should hold each other accountable and strive for better behavior at all times, and learn from our mistakes.  Dehlin needs to do this, and I hope that he will.  Current church leaders need to do this as well, and Oak's famous statement that the church won't apologize for mistakes, is an extremely unfortunate precedent to make for a flawed organization led by flawed individuals, but an organization that is trying to do good in the world.  I hope for better leadership that is humble enough to own up to mistakes, that seeks for greater transparency and that is constantly repenting and trying to improve itself.  

I agree with this totally.  Should there be the same benefit of doubt as many here have for apostles/prophets?  A human condition of err??  I just wanted to say that John Dehlin was and is the only person back in the day to ask me to return to church.  In any case, I am on the fence here.  I have benefited a lot from John's podcasts/stories.  That being said, I only check in on things that really interest me.  I am at the point where some stories are the same..and I have moved on. 

[rockpond]

27 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

One major problem I have with this recent news, and I'm trying to follow the conversation to see what transpires on this point.  Its with the way funds have been allocated.  As I listen to podcasts, I always assumed that if I donated to Mormon Matters or A Thoughtful Faith, that those funds would be specifically earmarked to those podcast hosts, and not just put into a larger fund that is allocated using a different method.  Some of the comments in the threads have talked about changing to a new per download method of payment, and thats fine to change it going forward, but that needs to be transparent and clear because I think most podcast consumers assumed that donations to any individual podcast would go to the hosts of those podcasts.  This has been my largest complaint and I'd like to see some better explanations about how this was handled and will be handled in the future.  

This is addressed on the Finances page of OpenStoriesFoundation.org.

Based on the 2015 income statement, every podcaster received more in pay ("contractual services") than what they brought in via donations ("direct public support) EXCEPT for Dehlin who made less than his podcast brought in via donations.  So, Dehlin's MS podcast is actually helping to financially support the newer/smaller podcasts.

Regarding pay for podcasters, this statement is at the top of the page:  

"Starting January 1, 2016 all OSF podcasters were placed on a fixed income disbursement.  After commissioning an external compensation review of comparable organizations, John Dehlin's base salary as CEO of the Open Stories Foundation, and as host of Mormon Stories Podcast, was set at $75,000/year for 2016."

 

[rpn]

Dehlin has made no secret of his personal need to make money at this.   The problem is that he tries to do it in the form of a charitable non-profit, and that he apparently isn't sharing the wealth with others who also contributing time effort and their own podcasts.   And the fact that is has such a salary (and insurance which is likely to be $15-20K for a family) and expenses that those who do it for the cause are taken advantage of (which makes me wonder why they are willing to do what they do for free --- and apparently some have realized that they are being taken advantage of and have quit.)    It is not clear if OSF pays him with a 1099 or a W-2.  If the latter, OSF also pays some $7200 in employment taxes on his behalf.

So long as there are people willing to do the work for free, it may be tough to prove that OSF is not a charitable organization --- after all, he can show that he posts a lot of podcasts, the content of which is useful to people, even if they have to listen to 4 hours of what should be a well-edited 45 minutes.

But OSF has apparently not filed its 990 form, due May 15 if accounting year continues to be Dec 31st (though they can get extension).  And since OSF is now sponsoring seminars and cruises, it may be engaged in business ventures that are not charitable and therefore not exempt  (they can do such things, but they have to report its charitable purpose on the 990).

And he apparently doesn't publicly state how much he pays podcasters or for that matter subjects (each of whom in a typical world would be repped by an agent who would assure they got their own piece of the pie rather than having John Dehlin make money off of their story).   If it is true that he pays women less (rather than simply paying podcasters with established audiences more) than that is likely discrimination.   My guess is that the sums are so low that no one would ever find an attorney to take the case: shaming would be the sole remedy beyond refusing to let OSF profit off the podcaster any more.

It is pretty common for business entities, even so called charitable one, to limit the size of their corporate entity to the three required by most state laws.  What is disingenous is that the OSF Board statement and the supporters statements appear to be solely those who were chosen by Dehlin and who Dehlin supervises, and who are paid.   In 2015 Dehlin took 92K, but Witherspoon took 35K (why did Ms. Porter(?) only get $5500?)  Entities that are run in a truly businesslike fashion, have what are called outside directors to help them stay straight and challenge their inappropriate including but not limited to self-dealing actions.   

If I were an OSF donor, I would no longer donate either time or money to OSF until they had at least two outside directors that could only be fired by a supermajority of 4 of 5 (there are apparently 3 now, since that is disclosed on the 2015 990).   And I'd also want the Board to approve a written contract with Dehlin who is apparently operating as Executive Director), that was no longer than 3 years, required disclosure of all entities paying Dehlin and set performance goals which were public.

 

Edited May 22, 2017 by rpn

[hope_for_things]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

This is addressed on the Finances page of OpenStoriesFoundation.org.

Based on the 2015 income statement, every podcaster received more in pay ("contractual services") than what they brought in via donations ("direct public support) EXCEPT for Dehlin who made less than his podcast brought in via donations.  So, Dehlin's MS podcast is actually helping to financially support the newer/smaller podcasts.

Regarding pay for podcasters, this statement is at the top of the page:  

"Starting January 1, 2016 all OSF podcasters were placed on a fixed income disbursement.  After commissioning an external compensation review of comparable organizations, John Dehlin's base salary as CEO of the Open Stories Foundation, and as host of Mormon Stories Podcast, was set at $75,000/year for 2016."

 

Thanks Rockpond, thats interesting and I didn't know about that.  So, did the 2015 income statement specifically show how much revenue each podcast brought in?  

Also, do you know when they changed from the model that you mention (fixed income) vs. the newer model I saw some comments discussing which would be based on the # of downloads for each of the podcasts? 

 

[Storm Rider]

On 5/21/2017 at 11:53 PM, sjdawg said:

I'm not sure who would be in this cult.  I'm not certain Dehlin has as many followers as people think but I could be wrong.  All I know is that although he has some occasional interviews that I find interesting, most of his work doesn't interest me at all.  I'd certainly never donate to what he is doing and I think his popularity is waning.

I think I probably miswrote/misspoke.  When reading some of the comments I found the overall feeling to be cultish - not actually a cult.  The number of followers is irrelevant rather it is simply how the individuals interact with one another.  

Sj, I listened to a few of his episodes years ago and I have not listened to anything since.  I have commented on this Board about his work and his actions, but overall he is not an individual or has a product I interact with to any degree.  At the end of the day, I suspect he likes what he was doing helping people that were losing their faith and later wanted to create a way to make money from it.  His heart may have started out in the right place - to help people - but that morphed into a money making enterprise and the helping people became a lower priority.  I conclude this from the manner in which he does not pay people for the hours worked, seeks to have all the attention on him, and tries to hide his actions by keeping things private....which are some of the criticisms he has thrown at the LDS Church. 

Edited May 23, 2017 by Storm Rider

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks Rockpond, thats interesting and I didn't know about that.  So, did the 2015 income statement specifically show how much revenue each podcast brought in?  

Also, do you know when they changed from the model that you mention (fixed income) vs. the newer model I saw some comments discussing which would be based on the # of downloads for each of the podcasts? 

 

Yes, the financial statements show how much each podcast (indivudually) brought in through public support and they show how much each podcast is paid for their services.  And, in every case the podcasters are paid MORE than the amount of donations they raised (except for Dehlin who is paid less).

I don't know if they have switched to a payment model based on the number of downloads.  I guess we'll have to wait for the 2016 statement.

[HappyJackWagon]

16 minutes ago, rockpond said:

This is addressed on the Finances page of OpenStoriesFoundation.org.

Based on the 2015 income statement, every podcaster received more in pay ("contractual services") than what they brought in via donations ("direct public support) EXCEPT for Dehlin who made less than his podcast brought in via donations.  So, Dehlin's MS podcast is actually helping to financially support the newer/smaller podcasts.

Regarding pay for podcasters, this statement is at the top of the page:  

"Starting January 1, 2016 all OSF podcasters were placed on a fixed income disbursement.  After commissioning an external compensation review of comparable organizations, John Dehlin's base salary as CEO of the Open Stories Foundation, and as host of Mormon Stories Podcast, was set at $75,000/year for 2016."

 

There will always be disputes between employers/employees. Employees often overestimate their value and Employers often underestimate. It will probably always be so. As with any relationship, an employment relationship is a continual negotiation. When one party feels they can't continue to negotiate, the relationship ends.

It sounds to me like Kristy didn't feel like she was being paid fairly. Whether she's right or not, I have no clue. But it does seem like the payment method was determined in advance so there shouldn't have been any surprises. If she feels like she didn't earn enough for the amount of time she put in then it is reasonable for her to leave. I hope she wasn't expecting equity of pay between all podcasters because that likely wouldn't have been a fair arrangement. In any case, I've enjoyed listening to all of the principles in this dispute so I hope this dust-up is remedied soon and the drama can end. It benefits no one.

 

[rockpond]

15 minutes ago, rpn said:

Dehlin has made no secret of his personal need to make money at this.   The problem is that he tries to do it in the form of a charitable non-profit, and that he apparently isn't sharing the wealth with others who also contributing time effort and their own podcasts.  

That's false.  See the 2015 Income Statement for OSF.

16 minutes ago, rpn said:

even if they have to listen to 4 hours of what should be a well-edited 45 minutes.

That's a matter of opinion.  I really enjoy hearing the detail that gets shared by people and the insight that comes from it with the length of podcasts Dehlin produces.

17 minutes ago, rpn said:

And he apparently doesn't publicly state how much he pays podcasters

This is a completely false statement.  The pay for each podcast is detailed on the OSF Finances page (for the last 5 years).

19 minutes ago, rpn said:

It is pretty common for business entities, even so called charitable one, to limit the size of their corporate entity to the three required by most state laws.  What is disingenous is that the OSF Board statement and the supporters statements appear to be solely those who were chosen by Dehlin and who Dehlin supervises, and who are paid.   In 2015 Dehlin took 92K, but Witherspoon took 35K (why did Ms. Porter(?) only get $5500?)  Entities that are run in a truly businesslike fashion, have what are called outside directors to help them stay straight and challenge their inappropriate including but not limited to self-dealing actions.   

If I were an OSF donor, I would no longer donate either time or money to OSF until they had at least two outside directors that could only be fired by a supermajority of 4 of 5 (there are apparently 3 now, since that is disclosed on the 2015 990).   And I'd also want the Board to approve a written contract with Dehlin who is apparently operating as Executive Director), that was no longer than 3 years, required disclosure of all entities paying Dehlin and set performance goals which were public.

Are you willing to impose that same standard on the LDS Church?  Just curious.

[stemelbow]

7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

That's false.  See the 2015 Income Statement for OSF.

That's a matter of opinion.  I really enjoy hearing the detail that gets shared by people and the insight that comes from it with the length of podcasts Dehlin produces.

This is a completely false statement.  The pay for each podcast is detailed on the OSF Finances page (for the last 5 years).

Are you willing to impose that same standard on the LDS Church?  Just curious.

I'm pretty sure the complaint by Money is since the change in the pay structure. 

But I'd suggest going on the numbers before the change, I wouldn't know how anyone would complain since, as you pointed out, they would have been paid more than they brought in, other than Dehlin.  Makes me a little more curious if Money has any legitimacy to her complaints though.  She also claimed, I thought I saw somewhere, that she didn't get paid for things that were previously agreed upon to pay her and that others had a similar gripe.  But I read on the reddit thread, where Dehlin quoted Wotherspoon, who contested that on the basis of he hadn't heard of it. 

Sounds like an ugly deal whatever the case.  Why it went public might be the biggest problem here.  I know she said she made it public because he didn't satisfy her in private when brought up.  But, the vagueness and the lack of substance to her complaints (meaning they are alleged with nothing to back them up at this point) make her complaints sound convenient in the extreme if she really just wants to complain about Dehlin. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by stemelbow

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

I'm pretty sure the complaint by Money is since the change in the pay structure. 

But I'd suggest going on the numbers before the change, I wouldn't know how anyone would complain since, as you pointed out, they would have been paid more than they brought in, other than Dehlin. 

Yeah - I just don't know anything about the change in pay structure (if there was one).

And if they did switch to a pay-per-download structure than I'm not sure what her specific complaint would be.

[ttribe]

I'm surprised by exactly none of this.

[rpn]

I don't think it is false.   Even if the report says that the podcasters in 2015 were paid more than their podcasts brought in, it doesn't say how that was determined.  Mormon stories is big and even if some podcasts prompt specific donations, that cannot be fairly said to be the entirety of the benefits bestowed by the individual podcaster or the specific podcasts.    And others have pointed out that they believed, apparently erroneously, that when they donated to a particular podcast, it went to that podcaster (sp?).  

And I am willing to hold every other charitable organization to that same standard.  

Churches are a whole different ballgame for the constitutional reason that our liberty happens because we can freely worship, and taxation by government will  necessarily curtail that religious freedom.   It is really silly to suggest that OSF and any church should operate in the same structure and expectations.

[juliann]

16 minutes ago, rockpond said:

 

Are you willing to impose that same standard on the LDS Church?  Just curious.

It has been enlightening to see the efforts to change the topic. The LDS Church's financials are a diversion from the issue at hand.... with the exception that OSF brought the church into it by demanding a standard it is not upholding itself. 

 

12 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

 

Sounds like an ugly deal whatever the case.  Why it went public might be the biggest problem here.  I know she said she made it public because he didn't satisfy her in private when brought up.  But, the vagueness and the lack of substance to her complaints (meaning they are alleged with nothing to back them up at this point) make her complaints sound convenient in the extreme if she really just wants to complain about Dehlin. 

It doesn't sound all that vague to me, especially as others join in to confirm. Since the complaints are the lack of disclosure and transparency, it doesn't make much sense to demand it be produced by others. Nor is waiting for tax filings a useful excuse since those documents do not give the necessary detail.

Peggy Fletcher Stack responded to Kate Kelly's call for boycotts and news coverage by saying she was thinking about it. I thought this would die down quickly but it seems to be expanding, especially regarding misogyny in the exmo world. It is being blamed on church training, of course, which is kind of odd considering the world wide research that confirms it is ubiquitous. 

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, juliann said:

I thought this would die down quickly but it seems to be expanding, especially regarding misogyny in the exmo world. It is being blamed on church training, of course, which is kind of odd considering the world wide research that confirms it is ubiquitous. 

Ironic, since these are the people who insist that the Church should have been avant garde, ahead of the curve, instead of reactionary, on racism and sexism. 

Yet, when unshackled from Mormonism, and free to lead out, they . . . blame "old habits of Mormonism dying hard" for their hypocrisy. 

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, rpn said:

And others have pointed out that they believed, apparently erroneously, that when they donated to a particular podcast, it went to that podcaster (sp?).  

Who has said that it doesn't?  Based on the financials, money donated to a particular podcast DOES go to that podcaster... plus additional money that was donated to the MS podcast.

[rockpond]

6 minutes ago, juliann said:

Nor is waiting for tax filings a useful excuse since those documents do not give the necessary detail.

It's the annual income statement and balance sheet (published every year, in detail) that is being waited on.  Not tax filings.