“Dear Dan’s Diary”


Loyd Ericson (aka “the narrator”)


Somebody called my attention just this afternoon to a small blog, run by Loyd Ericson, that’s devoted to mocking me (mostly by modifying entries originally posted here to make them look even more stupid and repugnant than, in his view, they already were, and then putting them against a pink and red background with hearts streaming across it).


Loyd is the managing editor of Greg Kofford Books, a vocally enthusiastic fan of the Maxwell Institute’s “new direction” and a friend to several of those who now run that organization, very outspoken in his derision of the pre-2012 FARMS or Maxwell Institute, and, it’s already been clear for some time, a distinctly obsessive despiser of . . .  well, me.  (This newly-discovered blog is only the most recent evidence to surface.  I’ve had to delete a fair number of his comments from my blog and from my Facebook page over the past year or two, because, while I don’t mind critics and criticism, repetitious short personal insults grow wearisome, contribute nothing of value, and clutter up the page.)


I have no idea how long Loyd has had this little blog of his, but it seems that it’s been up for a while.  I thought that some readers here might find it mildly amusing and/or interesting.



"Religion Poisons Everything!" (31)
"How a Gay-Marriage Study Went Wrong"
New Testament 167
"Colesville Restoration"
  • Brian Kissell

    To be fair… it is a pretty looking blog. ;)

    • DanielPeterson


  • G Rant

    So this blog seems to straddle the gulf between flattering and creepy. He’s a religious Weird Al Yankovic, minus the talent, humour and insight.

    • DanielPeterson

      Yeah. Other than the missing talent, humor, and insight, they’re roughly comparable.

    • dangerdad

      The new NAMI sure has some creepy, stalker-y friends doesn’t it?

      • DanielPeterson

        There’s certainly been a social change there since June 2012. The circle of friends has changed dramatically. It’s highly instructive.

  • Darren

    Sunlight does disinfect. I just linked onto the blog by Loyd Ericson and all entries have been removed. He is also planning to remove the entire blog itself. What kind of dumb-a** friends do the current leadership at Mormons Studies run with? Ericson seems more juvenile than many of my high school friends and believe me, that’s a pretty low standard to measure up (or down) to. (Point being, I’ve grown since high school, Loyd has apparently not. And, no, I do not assume Ericson models the typical friend the current Mormon Studies leadership possess).

    • Seth Payne


      I know Loyd and have interacted with him for years. He and Dan have a long-standing feud which motivated this blog, I’m guessing. Also, he was very upset at what he perceived as misrepresentation of his work by Dan at last year’s FAIR conference. I don’t know enough about the details to comment either way on that specific issue. However, I can understand wanting to engage in, and let’s be honest here, relatively harmless joke. No one who read Loyds blog would conclude that Dan actually wrote it. It was so over-the-top and obviously intended to be pure satire.

      Heck, Dan and I have exchanged different views — often quite vigorously — over the years.

      When engaging with those with whom we seriously disagree it is easy to slip into “rhetorical zing” mode, I think. We all do it (but probably shouldn’t) and online communications make it that much easier.

      Don’t allow your admiration for Dan cloud your thinking and assessment of others.

      My $.02.


      • DanielPeterson

        Again, I simply haven’t done these sorts of things to Loyd, and I actually don’t feel any animosity toward him. He plainly does toward me, though.

        • Seth Payne

          Dan, you are a polarizing figure. You have been for a long time as you take very strong positions on religious subjects. Personally I have only had a taste of this as certain folks have taken issue with a few things I have written. But you have been at this for a long long time and have ticked off a lot of people along the way. This isn’t a condemnation or even a moral judgment. Just a statement of fact. A lot of people feel animosity towards you simply because you are a public figure within Mormonism. My main objective in replying to this thread was not to justify Loyd’s blog or even to comment on any existing animosity (as you can tell I am not well-versed on the subject). Rather, it was simply to point out that my friend Loyd is a good scholar, is well-respected, and is doing a fantastic job helping to turn Greg Kofford books into a premier Mormon Studies publishing house. Thus, I object to Loyd being characterized as a “hack” by certain commentors on this post.

          • DanielPeterson

            That’s fine. I think Loyd is very bright, as well, and that he has much to contribute.

            But this particular “feud” has always been essentially one-sided and, to me, very strange and unpleasant and unwelcome.

          • Seth Payne

            Well, I think one thing we can all agree on is that Sic et Non needs falling hearts onscreen. :)

          • DanielPeterson

            Sorry about the grave lack of falling hearts. In my defense, I can only plead that I’m both aesthetically challenged and computer illiterate.

      • Darren

        ” Also, he was very upset at what he perceived as misrepresentation of his work by Dan at last year’s FAIR conference. ”

        I read about that on Ericson’s blog. Dan responded to him on that blog. note in the comment section where the animosity is originating. Not “disagreement” but *animosity*.

        Dan’s opening statement to Loyd in the comments: “Loyd, I actually thought your paper was pretty good, and a useful classification of possible “Mormon studies” approaches. ”

        Loyd’s opening comment to Dan in response: ”
        With a lot of strain I could almost sense a budding apology (which many doubt could ever exist) that was desperately trying to come out — before it was beaten down by your ego.”

        Yeah ,the animosity is a one way street with Loyd. There is no animosity “between” Dan and Loyd just with Loyd towards Dan and its origin unkown so far as I know.


  • Darren

    Last night the last entry on Tim Barker’s bog over ‘the narrator’ was as follows:

    “On a side note, I think your blog pseudonymously posted as Dan Peterson is
    extremely juvenile and petty, and I also see you that you just now eliminated my
    accessing this blog. If this is the level that you operate at, than I am
    inclined to take little concern regarding your opinions on my post.”


    The thread’s grown since then. The best of luck to Loyd Ericson and all his endeavors but why in the world a publishing company like Greg Kofford Books, which has some outstanding publications of Mormonism would employ a cheap-rate troll and hack like Loyd Ericson is beyond my understanding.

    • Seth Payne

      Hi Darren,

      As much as one may disagree with Loyd’s choice to put up this satirical blog, it is very unfair to characterize him as a “cheap-rate troll and hack.” Loyd is an excellent scholar who studied under Richard Bushman at Claremont. I have heard several well-known and well-respected LDS scholars speak very highly of Loyd and his scholarship. In any case, Loyd’s blog should not detract from his position as a scholar. If we were to judge scholars based on their inside jokes then both Dan and Bill would have to be discounted for their “METCALFE IS BUTTHEAD” joke. We all make jokes. Some fall flat, others are funny, and most are unmemorable.

      Heaven knows that I have said things online that were potentially offensive and unnecessarily snarky. And I surely hope that my published papers etc. are not judged by online antics.

      Loyd is a good guy and I think it is very unfortunate that such animosity exists between him and Dan.


      • Jeffrey Thayne

        Seth, as I’ve been following this over the years, Loyd is consistently and outspokenly demeaning and rude to those he disagrees with. He behaves in unChristian ways, and has done so for quite some time. Darren’s assessment is based not on a one-time joke, but on years of observation and consistent behavior.

        • Seth Payne

          Hi Jeffrey,

          Understood. Your point is well-taken. Loyd is a passionate guy, no question about it. Loyd is more capable than I to “defend” his online actions so I won’t do so here. However, I stick by my point that even if we assume Loyd is a vile human being (which, of course, he isn’t. I know him to be very kind and generous even though we disagree on many things), it has no bearing on the quality of his scholarship or his place as a scholar. Loyd is not a “hack” by any stretch of the imagination.


        • DanielPeterson

          That’s been my personal experience with him, too, sad to say.

      • DanielPeterson

        The animosity simply isn’t mutual or symmetrical. Loyd has routinely showed up on my blog and on my Facebook page to make personally insulting comments — and, as this incident clearly demonstrates — has also been doing it elsewhere (presumably including places I’m not even aware of).

        I don’t follow him anywhere, and seldom think about him except when he’s attacking me. I’ve had to delete a number of his insults over the past several months, as, apparently, have others.

      • Darren

        Seth Payne;

        “Loyd is an excellent scholar who studied under Richard Bushman at Claremont.’

        I’ve absolutely no doubt as to the scholarly knowledge Loyd Ericson possesses. Why then waste so much given light as to single out Dan Peterson (who’s no dummy in his own right) for constant attacks and beratement? My pronouncement of Loyd Ericson is based strictly on his vindictive attacks against Dan Peterson on the internet. Ericson is what I classify as a Progressive-thinking elitist who (Progressives) frequently (very frequently) resort to demeaning their opposition. Did you follow Ericson on his last posts on Dan’s facebook thread? Good grief, Ericson could not even offer an apology for what was an abundantly clear bad tasting “joke” to mock Dan Peterson’s blog posts, including forming at least one where Peterson harbors homosexual lust of sorts, without mocking Dan’s own words using an apology Peterson previously wrote about a lapse in judgment he (Peterson) made. I just updated myself in that facebook thread and read Ericson adamantly saying that his “Dan’s Journal” blog was created last week yet another poster on that thread showed his posts as time stamped in 2012. These alone together cements Loyd Ericson as a cheap troll and by hack I referred to Ericson’s attempts to prevent another blogger whose site Ericson trolled from reading Ericson’s profile apparently in an attempt to avoid identification. It could have been done in jest knowing Ericson would eventually be identified, I don’t know for sure, but regardless, that’s a hack job.

        Why would a scholar with vast knowledge do any such thing? The only form of connection I can figure is Ericson’s own progressive outlook on life, even in the LDS church. I’ve no problem loving and worshipping with LDS Progressives (I actively do) despite my strong disagreements with that line of thinking, but I have found that Progressives, as I stated, frequently look down upon their opponents. It’s an elitist mentality: only the “best and brightest” are to be engaged and by “best and brightest”, they mean those who agree with them. Is there any indication why Loyd Ericson even considered Daniel Peterson as such an enemy in the first place? I find Loyd’s reasoning is that Peterson engages in apologetics (which I am so very grateful he does) and Loyd Ericson doesn’t believe in doing so. If I err, please correct me.

        In the end, I find Loyd Ericson’s actions that of, as I posted previously on this thread, a dumb a**ed juvenile. I say this because what he has done remuinds me of my dumb a**ed juvenile friends I hung with in high school when I was a dumb a**ed juvenile myself. But I’ve matured much since then and Loyd Ericson needs to grow the hell up as well.

        ” If we were to judge scholars based on their inside jokes then both Dan and Bill would have to be discounted for their “METCALFE IS BUTTHEAD” joke.”
        I don’t even know what that joke is but nevertheless I find your comparison stupid. You’re comparing “a” (that’s “one” singular) joke to frequent and repetitive cyber stalking? Please, spare me, dude.
        I’ve said things I’ve later regretted. I’ve no problem with repenting and moving on. I sure need to do that. But I don’t even see Loyd Ericson as remorseful for what he did. As per my facebook reference, he doesn’t even apologize without mocking Dan and later he purports what I can only see as lies about his bad joke. Then he plays the sad violin about how he must be “unforgivable’.
        All around pathetic.

      • Darren

        “Loyd is a good guy and I think it is very unfortunate that such animosity exists between him and Dan. ”
        That is *SUCH* a poor description. It is animosity from Loyd and Loyd alone towards Dan that is the problem. Leave Dan out of the animosity. Dan’s a lot better man than I cuz I have *lots* of animosity for Loyd and he’s never stalked me. I simply have little to no tolerance for his behavior and demeanor.

    • IamMeWhoareYou

      I for one will vote with my wallet. I will buy no books from Greg Kofford Books while he remains managing editor.

      • Seth Payne

        Loyd has been editor for a while and I think we can all agree Kofford releases have been stellar.

        I think it is quite irrational to not buy a book from a publishing house because you disagree with an employee’s inside joke.

        • IamMeWhoareYou

          What you consider an “inside joke” I and most other posters on this and other blogs where Loyd posts his nasty comments, see something more than a one time “joke”.

          When you post in public places you need to be aware that you can and will be held accountable. I purchase and read a lot of LDS books. I have many choices and I choose not to support Greg Kofford Books because of the actions of their employee. There is nothing irrational at all about that.

          • Seth Payne

            Well, if you would like to deny yourself some of the best scholarship on Mormon topics simply because you disagree with the actions of an employee of the publisher, knock yourself out. Just seems like you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.

            I think Scott Lloyd’s approach is sensible:
            I myself have had some unpleasant online interactions with “the Narrator” in the past.

            But in fairness, it’s worth noting that the blog has been removed and the home page now contains this notice:

            “This blog was meant as an inside joke for a few friends. It, like so
            many other offensive things done ignorantly online, was not that funny.
            It has been removed and will be completely gone in the next week.

            “My apologies to the person satired.”

          • IamMeWhoareYou

            If the above noted blog was his only “offensive thing done online” (I don’t believe it was done “ignorantly”) I would have much more sympathy for Loyd, but he has a history of this running through this blog and others where he is simply nasty with people. He is particularly critical of anything said by Brother Peterson and his attacks are not even on the subject, but are personal and from everything I have seen uncalled for. I choose not to do business with that kind of person.

            I doubt I will miss out on much because of my choice. There are many books published every day and I have not had to search very hard to find good LDS books.

            Scott Lloyd can have his opinion and I can have mine. The difference here is I will not attack Scott personally for his opinion just because it is different than mine.

          • IamMeWhoareYou

            When I want “some of the best scholarship on Mormon topics” I go here > http://www.mormoninterpreter.com

          • Scott_Lloyd

            Lest my above-quoted remark be misinterpreted here, I hasten to say that I am no admirer of Loyd Ericson, aka “The Narrator.”

            A friend showed me how I could access a cached version of the now-removed blog and, well, while I give Lloyd Ericson due credit for taking it down, he did himself as much as Dr. Peterson a favor with its removal.

            Some satire — such as Mark Twain’s ruminations on the Book of Mormon in “Roughing It” — I can appreciate on a certain level, finding it funny, perhaps insightful to a degree, even as I wholly disagree with its message.

            On the other hand, some satire is just plain lame and ham-handed.

            I leave it to the reader to determine in which category I place the ill-considered blog under discussion here.

          • IamMeWhoareYou

            Thank-you for the clarification, maybe our opinions are not so different on this matter. :)

  • JamesJ

    Wow. Some people have too much time on their hands.

    For what it’s worth, and for anyone else who also has said free time available, you can read a snapshot of deleted material (as of June 18) by Googling: cache:deardansdiary.blogspot.com

    or simply go to: http://bit.ly/19toGYQ

  • Chris Baker

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

    Let him mock. He’s a loser anyway.

  • Ben Tanner

    I think this guy must be obsessed with you Dan who in the world has time to do such a thing? Hopefully you don’t find him lurking around your yard.

  • Bernard_Gui

    Indeed. Thanks.

  • Hales Swift

    It is fairly clear that Loyd is representing Dan as an (adolescent) woman. Do we really need to be reinforcing that as a category of ridicule? Isn’t puberty hard enough without using it to cast scorn at one’s ideological opponents? It also doesn’t seem especially likely to attract women to Mormon Studies if they are used in this way.

  • RaymondSwenson

    For some people, there is a thin line between hatred and love. It is sort of like physicist Sheldon Cooper’s relationship with former Star Trek: The Next Generation actor and authentic nerd Will Wheaton, on the TV show “The Big Bang Theory”, alternating between hero worship and an obsessive vendetta.

  • Darren

    In all due sincerity, there may be truth to that.

  • Scott_Lloyd

    Just saw this post and went to the link to see what all the hubbub was about.

    I myself have had some unpleasant online interactions with “the Narrator” in the past.

    But in fairness, it’s worth noting that the blog has been removed and the home page now contains this notice:

    “This blog was meant as an inside joke for a few friends. It, like so
    many other offensive things done ignorantly online, was not that funny.
    It has been removed and will be completely gone in the next week.

    “My apologies to the person satired.”