Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 3


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, pogi said:

All I can say is that if that meme was of me, it would certainly cause me question if there is reason to repent

But we shouldn’t judge Hank Smith. We’ll post a meme about him with a nasty insinuation and thereafter just “leave it at that.”
 

Um, OK. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Just for argument’s sake...

That is unrelated.

Edited by pogi
Posted
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

But we shouldn’t judge Hank Smith. We’ll post a meme about him with a nasty insinuation and thereafter just “leave it at that.”
 

Um, OK. He himself apologized for them.  I am just pointing out what he already acknowledged.

By posting the meme, I was simply defending the perception that his comments were likely unsavory.  He himself apologized for them.  What more do you want?

Acknowledging that he likely said some unsavory things when others were questioning if perceptions were slanted against him, is not the same as judging his overall character for having a moment of weakness.  You are the only one making insinuations here.

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Rain said:

It also may be that he truly feels sorry.

Hope so, he has a few students that deserve apologies. And someone that is giving advice or teaching should be above this behavior. And now this petition to have him terminated. So whatever that is coming from, there must be more than his one comment, but again not sure if what I've read is true. https://www.change.org/p/daniel-k-judd-terminate-professor-hank-smith?source_location=topic_page

 

Edited by Tacenda
Posted
4 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Hope so, he has a few students that deserve apologies. If what I'm reading is correct. And someone that is giving advice or teaching should be above this behavior. A group of them put out a petition to have him fired, I guess. So whatever that is coming from, there must be more than his one comment. 

If I remember correctly, his faculty page at BYU was taken down quite quickly yesterday after this all broke.  Not sure what exactly that means, but it did happen. 

Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Hope so, he has a few students that deserve apologies. If what I'm reading is correct. And someone that is giving advice or teaching should be above this behavior. 

We should all be above this behavior, but alas we are fallen humans and succumb to moments of weakness - not to excuse the behavior.  Something else we should all be above is not offering forgiveness and second chances.

Is there any evidence that this is a recurring pattern of behavior for him?   If not then we should take him at his word and move on.
 

 

Edited by pogi
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, pogi said:

We should all be above this behavior, but alas we are fallen humans and succumb to moments of weakness - not to excuse the behavior.  Something else we should all be above is not offering forgiveness and second chances.

Is there any evidence that this is a recurring pattern of behavior for him?   If not then we should take him at his word and move on.
 

 

I've read there is, but I've no proof. And I agree that forgiveness is needed and I hope through him doing what it takes like apologizing, and hopefully he'll apologize in person, that he'll see the error, because what I read is that he apologized in the wee hours of the night, so hopefully it will be a better apology than that. 

uaxwcgAJGpcxPZr-800x450-noPad.jpg?1619477030

Edited by Tacenda
Posted
36 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Hope so, he has a few students that deserve apologies. And someone that is giving advice or teaching should be above this behavior. And now this petition to have him terminated. So whatever that is coming from, there must be more than his one comment, but again not sure if what I've read is true. https://www.change.org/p/daniel-k-judd-terminate-professor-hank-smith?source_location=topic_page

 

As far as I know this was the only comment. 2 months ago a professor at BYU called a student a homophobic bigot for reading the Family Proclamation in a twitter post. This professor and Hank should be held to the same standard of accountability if that is what we are truly doing. My opinion is that is not the case with Hank 

Posted
21 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I've read there is, but I've no proof. And I agree that forgiveness is needed and I hope through him doing what it takes like apologizing, and hopefully he'll apologize in person, that he'll see the error, because what I read is that he apologized in the wee hours of the night, so hopefully it will be a better apology than that. 

uaxwcgAJGpcxPZr-800x450-noPad.jpg?1619477030

He apologized and deleted his comments.  Did he make any other personal attacks to anyone else that he should apologize for?  

Posted
5 minutes ago, pogi said:

He apologized and deleted his comments.  Did he make any other personal attacks to anyone else that he should apologize for?  

That's what they are saying, that this isn't the first time, but I've no proof at this juncture. But really I'm not all that invested except that I'm thinking Hank should know better and all his advice/teaching the youth work, that earns him money, seems a bit shallow to me now. 

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

That's what they are saying, that this isn't the first time, but I've no proof at this juncture. But really I'm not all that invested except that I'm thinking Hank should know better and all his advice/teaching the youth work, that earns him money, seems a bit shallow to me now. 

He should, and did, know better, hence the apology.  I wouldn’t judge his entire history of work and character on one online interaction and without any further evidence.  That doesn’t seem fair.  

I am sure you would appreciate the same courtesy.

Edited by pogi
Posted
2 hours ago, pogi said:

He should, and did, know better, hence the apology.  I wouldn’t judge his entire history of work and character on one online interaction and without any further evidence.  That doesn’t seem fair.  

I am sure you would appreciate the same courtesy.

I would. 🙂

Posted
6 hours ago, pogi said:

By posting the meme, I was simply defending the perception that his comments were likely unsavory.  He himself apologized for them.  What more do you want?

Acknowledging that he likely said some unsavory things when others were questioning if perceptions were slanted against him, is not the same as judging his overall character for having a moment of weakness.  You are the only one making insinuations here.

What more do I want? I would have preferred you not add kerosene to the fire by reposting that meme implying guilt by association (I doubt HS controls what people post about him, any more than Elder Uchtdorf controls disaffected or former members who cite him) and that you not make assumptions about his mindset or intent beyond what was specifically expressed in his apology posts.

But I do commend you for pushing back on Tacenda’s unkind and presumptuous remarks.

 

 

 

Posted
23 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What more do I want? I would have preferred you not add kerosene to the fire by reposting that meme implying guilt by association (I doubt HS controls what people post about him, any more than Elder Uchtdorf controls disaffected or former members who cite him) and that you not make assumptions about his mindset or intent beyond what was specifically expressed in his apology posts.

But I do commend you for pushing back on Tacenda’s unkind and presumptuous remarks.  I have made no assumptions about his mindset, but you seem to be making assumptions about mine.  

 

 

 

I have already explained my intentions and believe that I have thoroughly demonstrated that I am not out to set kerosine on any fires or defame character.  You are reading between the lines and misjudging my intentions.  You are the only one making assumptions here.  He already admitted guilt, I am not assuming anything.

Posted
18 minutes ago, pogi said:

I have already explained my intentions and believe that I have thoroughly demonstrated that I am not out to set kerosine on any fires or defame character.  You are reading between the lines and misjudging my intentions.  You are the only one making assumptions here.  He already admitted guilt, I am not assuming anything.

Word to the wise - for *some*, absolute loyalty is more important than principle.  You rightly pointed out the errors in Smith's actions, but you are being attacked for not loyally looking the other way regarding his bad acts because it might reflect poorly on a certain "side" in the ongoing debate.

Posted
40 minutes ago, pogi said:

I have already explained my intentions and believe that I have thoroughly demonstrated that I am not out to set kerosine on any fires or defame character.  You are reading between the lines and misjudging my intentions.  You are the only one making assumptions here.  He already admitted guilt, I am not assuming anything.

As I understand it, HS apologized specifically for calling someone Korihor and generally for having offended anyone. The tenor of your remarks is that he disavowed or retracted what he said. Maybe he did, but I don’t think that can accurately be inferred from the known facts. 

It’s possible that someone might earnestly hold an opinion but refrain from expressing it on public fora (or take it down if already expressed) because one desires to avoid giving offense. 

 

 

Posted
26 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Word to the wise - for *some*, absolute loyalty is more important than principle.  You rightly pointed out the errors in Smith's actions, but you are being attacked for not loyally looking the other way regarding his bad acts because it might reflect poorly on a certain "side" in the ongoing debate.

I think that is an astute observation.  I’ve never played that way.  I always seem to piss off players from both sides in most things.  I equally tend to make friends on both sides.

Posted
17 minutes ago, pogi said:

I think that is an astute observation.  I’ve never played that way.  I always seem to piss off players from both sides in most things.  I equally tend to make friends on both sides.

Been there.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As I understand it, HS apologized specifically for calling someone Korihor and generally for having offended anyone. The tenor of your remarks is that he disavowed or retracted what he said. Maybe he did, but I don’t think that can accurately be inferred from the known facts. 

It’s possible that someone might earnestly hold an opinion but refrain from expressing it on public fora (or take it down if already expressed) because one desires to avoid giving offense. 

 

 

Isn’t apologizing for ones remarks and subsequently deleting those remarks equivalent to “retracting what he said”?

I don't doubt that he earnestly holds an opinion about what he said, as he clarified and restated his remarks in his apology in what he felt was a less offensive way.

Posted
1 hour ago, ttribe said:

Word to the wise - for *some*, absolute loyalty is more important than principle.  You rightly pointed out the errors in Smith's actions, but you are being attacked for not loyally looking the other way regarding his bad acts because it might reflect poorly on a certain "side" in the ongoing debate.

That's not how I see it.  I see 2 issues here.  1. A poor remark or two by HS. 2. A longer history that goes deznaz along with deznaz.

I think most or all of us can agree with #1.  I think many or most of us are saying there is not evidence for #2 and it is unfair to be linking him so.

Posted
1 hour ago, pogi said:

Isn’t apologizing for ones remarks and subsequently deleting those remarks equivalent to “retracting what he said”?

I don't doubt that he earnestly holds an opinion about what he said, as he clarified and restated his remarks in his apology in what he felt was a less offensive way.

That’s all I’m saying. 
 

And no, I don’t believe apologizing for the manner in which one’s remarks were expressed is tantamount to retracting them. To me, retraction implies a change of heart whereby one no longer holds the opinion that was earlier expressed. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

That’s all I’m saying. 
 

And no, I don’t believe apologizing for the manner in which one’s remarks were expressed is tantamount to retracting them. To me, retraction implies a change of heart whereby one no longer holds the opinion that was earlier expressed. 

A retraction of what one said could also constitute a change of heart in how one said something, and thereby deleting those comments.   I have done that plenty of times on these forums, where I have retracted a comment after remorse for the manner in which I said something while still holding to the idea of what I said.  There can be various reasons as to why one retracts what they said, we shouldn’t assume there can be only one.

I hope you can find it in you to accept that you misread my intentions and can move on now.

Posted
2 hours ago, Rain said:

That's not how I see it.  I see 2 issues here.  1. A poor remark or two by HS. 2. A longer history that goes deznaz along with deznaz.

I think most or all of us can agree with #1.  I think many or most of us are saying there is not evidence for #2 and it is unfair to be linking him so.

That's nice.  I'll just say, I've seen this movie and I know how it ends.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...