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