Because the RCH site is official, and the Recorder is voted into office, we want the RCH site to be only for official RCH business, and not a place where the Recorder can publish anything on his or her mind, and then have those opinions be considered "official" and "safe".
Keith has posted on a variety of unrelated topics including:
- Local fellowship business and "Entry Agreements"
- Comments on Denver's lectures
- Musings on Zion
- Baptism and spousal fidelity
- The wording for marriage ordinances
- Ways to receive the Holy Ghost
- How to make wine
- What constitutes "pure wine"
- How much wine we ought to consume and for what purpose
Really, it doesn't matter how amazing a guy he is, how he words his posts, if his posts are an opportunity to gain personal revelation (everything is!), how much he loves and seeks to follow God, if his posts are 100% true, if his intention is only to be helpful, or if I'm grateful for his efforts. That is all a tangent to the point. I'm glad people love him enough to defend him, I'm grateful for his labors, but he doesn't need defense. None of that really is pertinent to the issue raised here. I'll try to break it down clearly, how I see it:
1. He was elected central recorder, nothing more.
2. The website was born as the recorder's clearinghouse after he was voted into said position -a means to submit names to the central recorder- nothing more.
3. He is posting unofficial personal opinions and information on the official website.
Do you believe those to be accurate, first and foremost?
If so, I submit that means he has overstepped the bounds of his elected position of recorder and crossed over into the position of official spokesman.
It isn't a judgment of his heart, but the fruit of his actions AS recorder ON the official site. Liking him, agreeing with his posts, and being grateful for his service doesn't change the effect of his actions. If he had posted on a private blog it wouldn't be an issue. But he didn't, he used the official venue. If anyone else were recorder and did the same, it would still be inappropriate.
I admit it is likely that if I agreed with everything he said and how he said it I probably wouldn't even take notice of it. But I would hope when it was brought to my attention I would still recognize that overstepping of bounds and try to correct the small deviation while it is small, instead of leaving it unchecked. His lack of response to correspondence and continued posting despite the concerns already brought to him suggests his intention isn't to stop on his own and we shouldn't assume he will. Thus the discussed need for the group to step in with what is a very simple solution.