X-Message-Number: 1188 Date: 14 Sep 92 20:00:07 EDT From: Charles Platt <> Subject: CRYONICS Message-Id: <> To: Kevin Brown I have read the "Independence Day" message posted by Michael Paulle. Frankly I find the tone of it a bit embarrassing. It implies that a force of white knights has somehow vanquished an "evil empire." This is not a reasonable or constructive way to describe recent events. I am doubly embarrassed to see myself "thanked" in Michael Paulle's posting. In case anyone is unaware of the facts, my only participation in the recent board elections was to read Alcor's by-laws a few months ago and ask why the elections had not been held in the past. If I hadn't raised this question, I know other people were ready to do so. Since the result of the elections could have gone either way (for or against the current administration), asking for elections cannot be construed as any kind of political act. ----------- Other people may already be posting the news, but in case no one else has done so, here is an unofficial, abbreviated, personal summary of the September 13 board meeting. Three new members were elected. It was a long process, but it was scrupulously in accordance with the rules, and I think that Alcor will benefit from the outcome--not necessarily because the new members will be better than the old ones, but because critics of the current administration should be satisfied (at least for the time being), and as a result, we can hope for less time wasted on politics. Carlos Mondragon, Dave Pizer, Keith Henson, Hugh Hixon, Ralph Whelan, and Brenda Peters were re-elected to the board. Glen Tupler was not re-elected. Bill Jameson took himself off the ballot. Paul Genteman publicly admitted, with some chagrin, that he omitted to vote for himself; and partly as a result, he was not re-elected. Thus, three slots opened up. Steve Bridge, Mark Voelker, and Allen Lopp were chosen to fill those slots from a fairly large slate of possible candidates. Prior to the election, Allen Lopp circulated a very long, balanced, perceptive "position paper" outlining the steps he believes are necessary to revitalize Alcor in some areas. Steve Bridge has, of course, posted his own "position paper" here on the net in the past. Mark Voelker has been reticent on the subject of Alcor's politics and shortcomings. He presented himself as "the science candidate" (he has been building the world's first twin-probe scanning-tunneling electron microscope) and suggested it would be a good idea for one board member to be a scientist. Also, he may have been elected partly because he is a noncontroversial candidate who is known to some of the existing board members. Each of the nine outgoing members was allocated nine votes. These votes were applied to a slate of candidates which included the outgoing board members themselves (with the exception of Bill Jameson, who had removed himself from consideration). Each member could not cast more than one vote for any one candidate. A total of 63 votes were cast, out of a possible 81. Thus, some board members chose not to use all nine of their votes, which was a cause of some discussion and complaints after the results were tallied. Ralph Merkle pointed out that there have been studies of voting patterns proving conclusively that NO system of voting is entirely satisfactory. Personally I feel a great sense of relief, because the board has changed and the change should satisfy Alcor's critics. If anyone cares what I think, I think there is no pressing need right now to campaign for any further change. We now have at least three members of the board who have been publicly skeptical or critical of the way in which Alcor has been run. Surely, this should be sufficient to allay fears of an unbalanced, autocratic style of leadership. Critics should also be pleased by the pledge from Austin Tupler to pay for a full-scale audit of Alcor's books, and to arrange bonding of Alcor directors who have check-signing authority. The only down side to the meeting was Eric Klien's financial report, indicating that Alcor's expenditures this year have been higher than some of us realized. There was a lot of debate over Eric's figures, but I don't think anyone would disagree that Alcor needs more healthy members paying their dues, and more income from other sources. Maybe we should all start trying to achieve these objectives, instead of continuing to argue about the ways in which various funds have been used in the past. --Charles Platt Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1188