X-Message-Number: 1251
Date: 02 Oct 92 03:54:43 EDT
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: Re: cryonics: #1234 - #1235

With regard to Edgar Swank's message:
Though I don't want to cause yet another bitter argument, I observe that
yes, the system ACS follows does resemble the unbundling proposed. And
I will also observe that on balance ACS-TT has done far less well in
getting and keeping members than has Alcor. Does this tell us something
about the unbundling proposal itself?

Perhaps in some unknown future world and time, unbundling will become
practical. Right now, the number of committed cryonicists willing to play
a very active role remains so small that unbundling is simply a dream.
As a former member of ACS, I felt then and still feel that unbundling
led to a forced acceptance of people with far less commitment than is
really needed to the board of ACS, and thus to a quite distinct decline.

Perhaps its proponents will offer to put in the many hours of work
required for its success? 

There is, of course, one further issue, and one which Alcor's present
internal disputes suggest to me. It's quite possible that Alcor will
actually split into 2 or more separate organizations. So long as they
remain loosely allied, this need not hurt the chances of any patient,
and may deal (in another way) with the lawsuit problem (neuro patients
are VERY portable, as we've already seen).
				Best
					Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1251