tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post5682118825144091810..comments2023-10-07T04:06:40.018-05:00Comments on Save OBU: The Worst are Filled with Passionate IntensityAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15050790418399919111noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-49311603465193170492013-02-22T15:14:41.497-06:002013-02-22T15:14:41.497-06:00a copy of the Hoffeditz lawsuit is still online he...a copy of the Hoffeditz lawsuit is still online here:<br />http://cedarvilleproblems.com/evidence/lawsuit.pdf<br /><br />There is no "wrongful termination" claim anywhere....there are no "attacks" by Hoffeditz to analyze because that's the whole point: his "attacks" on other professors was an allegation that nobody could ever present any evidence to support, which is why things turned out great for him and bad for CU.infosharehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06802664696334044588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-26439248872678175112013-02-22T15:12:28.692-06:002013-02-22T15:12:28.692-06:00Done.Done.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15050790418399919111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-35107257638524820752013-02-22T13:35:21.650-06:002013-02-22T13:35:21.650-06:00Since I think it would be nice to be able to comme...Since I think it would be nice to be able to comment on Sarah's latest, how to disable comments in blogger:<br /><br />Go to "Settings" then "Posts and comments." Under "Who can comment?" click on "Registered User" or "User with Google Accounts." That disables Anonymous postings.Jaimie Teekellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07845537262456320501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-45942871226047882292013-02-22T12:55:27.237-06:002013-02-22T12:55:27.237-06:00You attack "reading comprehension" and i...You attack "reading comprehension" and immediately complain about ad hominem. Priceless.<br /><br />Save OBU has lost so much credibility by allowing you on here - you do no fact checking at all and only rely on shoddy reporting & sensationalism to smear innocent people. You are flat out wrong.<br /><br />There was no wrongful termination claim by Hoffeditz.<br />Let me repeat: there was no wrongful termination claim. <br /><br />Hoffeditz sued for:<br />Breach of Contract (Count I)<br />Defamation (Count II), and<br />Fraud (Count III).<br /><br />Hoffeditz dropped Defamation on his own, and in September 2009 the Judge ruled as follows:<br /><br />"THIS COURT HAVING NO SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION GRANTS DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS ON COUNT ONE OF THE COMPLAINT. DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS ON THE NARROW ISSUE OF FRAUD, AS ALLEGED IN COUNT THREE OF THE COMPLAINT, IS DENIED."<br /><br />The Hoffeditz' suit must have been "so shaky" that his claim for FRAUD survived summary judgment in September 2009 and went to trial in May 2011, which subsequently resulted with the school paying $300K+ and writing him the above recommendation letter.<br /><br />I wonder why the school didn't present any evidence or testimony to win the lawsuit? They were already all the way at trial, why suddenly give up then if the suit was "so shaky"? <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-87835016467418096862013-02-22T11:09:49.766-06:002013-02-22T11:09:49.766-06:00Hoffeditz's suit was so shaky that his wrongfu...Hoffeditz's suit was so shaky that his wrongful termination claim got dismissed by a Greene County judge in 2009. Cedarville's one and only failing: they extended his contract when they knew he was going to be terminated. And that was wrong. <br /><br />Given your glaring lack of reading comprehension, I'll repeat this: Cedarville refused to release evidence to AAUP. I personally believe they should have released that evidence, because it leads to claims like yours. But the fact remains that they believed that AAUP had a secular bias, and so they held onto their evidence. Doesn't mean that evidence didn't exist. <br /><br />If you can't make an argument without an ad hominem attack, your facts must not be particularly strong. And at least I've got the courage to write under my real name, Anonymous. Sarah Joneshttp://www.anthonybsusan.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-71115245913891393422013-02-22T08:45:36.024-06:002013-02-22T08:45:36.024-06:00Sarah is the "moving party" so to speak....Sarah is the "moving party" so to speak. She created the blog entry and made allegations without any evidence to support it.<br /><br />The burden is not on readers to come up with evidence to disprove the unproven. The burden is on Sarah to prove it in the first place when she opened her mouth first.<br /><br />AND FYI -- the 'proof' against her unproven accusations is in the public record of the Hoffeditz trial (Greene County, Ohio). Read the trial transcripts, nothing was presented. This is consistent with the AAUP report and the actions of CU (paying him a settlement, writing him a recommendation letter that is public at:<br /><br />https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s720x720/296577_633223599084_2087643952_n.jpg<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-65185778271339745222013-02-22T08:29:54.443-06:002013-02-22T08:29:54.443-06:00Sarah acknowledged that CU botched the separation....Sarah acknowledged that CU botched the separation. Here at Save OBU, where we have seen two well loved and highly qualified professors forced out of OBU for ideological reasons, we are very interested to learn about other schools' experiences, especially in this case where the administration's actions exposed the school to considerable financial damages and bad press.<br /><br />Also, it's pretty easy for an anonymous person to call someone else a despicable liar. Why don't you put your name out there and submit evidence that Sarah has mischaracterized the sitaution.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15050790418399919111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-82528212166867579712013-02-22T08:24:53.305-06:002013-02-22T08:24:53.305-06:00That doesn't mean that evidence DID exist eith...That doesn't mean that evidence DID exist either.<br /><br />It's disingenuous to suggest that:<br /><br />-Cedarville fired Hoffeditz, then<br />-became the Defendant in a lawsuit for FRAUD, DEFAMATION and BREACH OF CONTRACT, then<br />-paid hundreds of thousands in legal fees over the course of multiple years to defend itself, then<br />-not offer any settlement or apologies at all, then<br />-proceed all the way to trial, then<br />-sat THROUGH the entire trial and didn't present ANY evidence or testimony against Hoffeditz, and<br />-THEN magically decides to pay him $300K+ and write him a letter of recommendation!<br /><br />Sarah Jones is a despicable liar and the people at "Save OBU" have lost so much credibility by choosing to allow her to blog on this site.<br /><br />Anybody who believes that CU went through all of that with Hoffeditz - and willingly chose to sit on evidence that would support their termination of him - is a complete and total cook.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-43762674003648526712013-02-22T08:13:32.520-06:002013-02-22T08:13:32.520-06:00When and where were they proved? Not in the Courtr...When and where were they proved? Not in the Courtroom -- where it counts the most when you're defending yourself from a FRAUD claim!<br /><br />"That's why....well known..." but never mentioned or presented at trial.<br /><br />Complete fabrications and a perpetual lie of no substance.<br />You too would have paid for it handsomely just like CU did.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-84899098462264458892013-02-21T16:13:36.916-06:002013-02-21T16:13:36.916-06:00And what antics would those be? I didn't even ...And what antics would those be? I didn't even have a blog at the time. I started no petitions. I didn't write for Cedars at the time. I didn't hold a position in student government. In fact, I'd barely gotten on campus. Yes, I voiced opinions--just like the conservative students. Shockingly, those conservative students never got labelled 'attention grabbing.' By your definition, it seems the very act of holding liberal views qualifies as a cry for attention. Your assertion doesn't resemble reality. <br /><br />Hoffeditz's role in the conflict was well known to everyone on campus, and the professors he targeted are in an even better position than I am to describe the consequences of his behavior. Rightly or wrongly, Cedarville believed the AAUP held a secular bias, and refused to release all available evidence to then. That doesn't mean the evidence didn't exist. It's disingenuous to suggest otherwise.<br />Sarah Joneshttp://www.anthonybsusan.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-72046944848330452012013-02-21T16:07:24.454-06:002013-02-21T16:07:24.454-06:00They were proved. And that's why he was fired....They were proved. And that's why he was fired. You would have to be completely delusional (or deeply invested in protecting Hoffeditz) in order to believe that his termination was totally unmerited. Try actually speaking to the professors he targeted. They're mentioned specifically in the original letter of concern, and Hoffeditz's animosity towards them was well known on campus.Sarah Joneshttp://www.anthonybsusan.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-32016985260180204212013-02-21T16:06:55.828-06:002013-02-21T16:06:55.828-06:00leaning on the experience argument when thousands ...leaning on the experience argument when thousands of people on campus (who couldn't stand your attention grabbing antics) disagreed with you is a bad path to take... the hoff never did anything and like the above comments already say, nobody could prove otherwiseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-6824485773118628952013-02-21T16:04:56.071-06:002013-02-21T16:04:56.071-06:00lol 'he deserved to be fired'....for what?...lol 'he deserved to be fired'....for what? the very things you allege that nobody could prove?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-10932272690445736422013-02-21T12:41:00.810-06:002013-02-21T12:41:00.810-06:00Calm down, Gumprecht. Or Speiker, or whoever you a...Calm down, Gumprecht. Or Speiker, or whoever you are.<br /><br />Hoffeditz is responsible for some of the dirtiest, most aggressive tactics deployed by a human against other humans that I've ever seen, either in higher education or out of it. Cedarville did handle his termination poorly, but he absolutely deserved to be fired and the campus was a healthier place without him in it. And I know, because I was there.Sarah Joneshttp://www.anthonybsusan.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-23718462555533061922013-02-21T11:32:40.978-06:002013-02-21T11:32:40.978-06:00u mad bro?u mad bro?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-77268250503139391792013-02-21T10:58:26.890-06:002013-02-21T10:58:26.890-06:00AT THE END OF THE HOFFEDITZ TRIAL (RIGHT BEFORE TH...AT THE END OF THE HOFFEDITZ TRIAL (RIGHT BEFORE THE JURY GAVE A VERDICT), CU VOLUNTARILY PAID 300K+ TO HOFFEDITZ AND GAVE HIM A RECOMMENDATION LETTER BECAUSE THE TRIAL WENT HORRIBLY.<br /><br />CU HAD NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ANY ARGUMENTS AGAINST HIM OR HIS BEHAVIOR AT ALL. GO PULL THE PUBLIC RECORDS AND TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS...NO EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY WAS PRESENTED AGAINST HIM.<br /><br />HOFFEDITZ WON, CU HAD NO EVIDENCE, END OF STORY.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-16149112217715711362013-02-20T19:53:19.194-06:002013-02-20T19:53:19.194-06:00I agree with most of Olson's criteria, and bel...I agree with most of Olson's criteria, and believe that Hoffeditz, and the other members of the Coalition of the Concern, largely fit it. The reference to fundamentalist opposition to Billy Graham is especially interesting; members of GARBC's ruling council have voiced opposition to Graham for his 'liberalism' in the past. So I think it's further evidence that what we're seeing at Cedarville is a fundamentalist reaction to a perceived shift toward evangelicalism.Sarah Joneshttp://www.anthonybsusan.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-42587582178918405382013-02-20T19:32:13.711-06:002013-02-20T19:32:13.711-06:00http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/02/w...http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/02/what-is-fundamentalism-and-who-is-a-fundamentalist/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-55928221834996521302013-02-20T17:42:11.079-06:002013-02-20T17:42:11.079-06:001) The CU GIP certainly did not reveal anything of...1) The CU GIP certainly did not reveal anything of the sort. The AAUP report is hardly reliable considering the university refused to divulge any information to the AAUP on charges of the AAUP being biased against CU from the start. I know little about the court case so I won't speak on that.<br /><br />2) It seems like you're just operating on a different definition of fundamentalist than Sarah is. Many of the students at Cedarville are fundamentalist, so it is no surprise that Hoffeditz' classes were extremely popular. I'm not sure in what sense a fundamentalist would not be able to survive at any place. It's not like Ph.D. programs dictate what you believe. And KJV-onlyists are certainly *not* fundamentalists - those who prefer the KJV but are not KJV-onlyists generally are fundamentalists, but nothing about fundamentalism stipulates using the KJV. As Sarah pointed out, young earth creationism, premillenialism, and complementarianism are good marks of a fundamentalist (though you can certainly hold the three without being hard-line fundamentalist)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-83017530666598567852013-02-20T17:23:42.630-06:002013-02-20T17:23:42.630-06:00One of my CU friends was grumpy about Hoffeditz ba...One of my CU friends was grumpy about Hoffeditz bad-mouthing another professor even before all of this broke out. He's not the type to lie, although I admit this is second-hand information. In your case, third-hand...<br /><br />And Hoffeditz was popular because he was single, good-looking and a really good speaker. Very, very entertaining. Students told other students to take him because he made a dry subject (New Testament Literature, in my case) fun.Jaimie Teekellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07845537262456320501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-80371106671672135202013-02-20T16:38:30.279-06:002013-02-20T16:38:30.279-06:001.) Students in Hoffeditz's classes directly s...1.) Students in Hoffeditz's classes directly stated the contrary. If claims had never been made, Anonymous, then it would be impossible for me to know about them. Furthermore, the fact that some students have previously recorded Hoffeditz's lectures does not mean that the incriminating lectures I mentioned were themselves recorded. <br /><br />2.) Hoffeditz was very much a fundamentalist. His education is hardly evidence against that; I have a very dear friend at Aberdeen and studied in the UK myself. The PhD at Aberdeen is actually quite mixed. It is not universally liberal by any definition. And this is quite typical for theology and divinity programs in the UK. Hoffeditz holds to a strict complementarian view of gender. He is a young earth creationist, a premillennialist--the list goes on. His beliefs are identical to the doctrinal statement you'd find in any fundamentalist church. <br /><br />As to your last claim: my parents quite proudly identify as fundamentalist Christians, and do so for very specific doctrinal reasons. I am very familiar with the definition of a fundamentalist, I grew up in fundamentalist churches, and later rejected fundamentalism as a young adult. It is true I never had David Hoffeditz as a professor. But that does not mean I am so intellectually handicapped that I am incapable of critically examining the evidence available. I respect Dr. Mills and Dr. Gombis very much, but still disagree with them politically and theologically on most points. Your definition of 'puppet' is in need of revision, and so are your arguments.Sarah Joneshttp://www.anthonybsusan.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-41287062273135706062013-02-20T14:45:38.216-06:002013-02-20T14:45:38.216-06:00Regarding Hoffeditz:
1) The CU Grievance Panel re...Regarding Hoffeditz:<br /><br />1) The CU Grievance Panel report, the AAUP and his trial against the university FOR FRAUD (not wrongful termination!) clearly revealed that Hoffeditz NEVER mentioned any faculty member explicitly or implicitly in class! In fact, there were never any claims to this matter and no evidence could be presented - even in Court - to support this completely FALSE allegation.<br /><br />Hoffeditz had thousands of students, many who recorded his classes, and yet NOT one shred of evidence has ever been presented to show that he mentioned faculty by name NOR was there any formal or informal complaints to this matter.<br /><br />2) Hoffeditz was not a "fundamentalist" -- if he was, how could he have survived a PhD program at Aberdeen and Tuebingen? And why were his classes always locked out due to student demand? Even those who terminated him finally acknowledged his popularity in a written recommendation of his teaching skill. He doesn't even use a KJV Bible. Fundamentalist? No way. <br /><br />Obviously Sarah Jones clearly does not understand the definition of a fundamentalist nor who is involved in that camp. She never had Hoffeditz as a Bible professor and is a puppet who can only repeat - with vigor - the lines she has been fed by those she supports. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524895972705575613.post-34903320216729240082013-02-20T14:02:06.046-06:002013-02-20T14:02:06.046-06:00As someone who was at CU during this period (2006-...As someone who was at CU during this period (2006-2010), and who until recently knew little about what was really going on at the time (I just remember being confused and occasionally baffled - and angered about the Shaine Claiborne mess), this is by far the most coherent chronological explanation of events I've read regarding the background to the current controversy. Thank you for writing it so matter-of-factly. Sometimes it's hard, it seems, for people who are concerned and/or angered about all this to separate their (valid) emotions from the retelling of events, or to approach things in a balanced way. But this is needed so that others can first be open to the information and then come to their own conclusions. The truth always reveals itself eventually. Anyway, these posts do a good job of that. So thank you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com