X-Message-Number: 1455
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 20:20:00 +0100
From:  (David Stodolsky)
Subject: CRYONICS: re: splitting Alcor

Thomas Donaldson suggests improving the constitution of ALCOR as a way
to ensure stable operation and protection of patients. A first step
might be to separate the Board and the employees of ALCOR, as has
already been suggested. 

In Denmark it is standard practice in any company to separate the "law
making" and "law enforcing" powers. This does not mean that no one
employed at ALCOR could serve on the Board, although this would perhaps
be most desirable, only that the chief executive officer of ALCOR
(whatever this person is called) not be a voting member of the Board.

It seems that this is a simple precaution that would avoid potential
conflicts of interest. It would also increase the number of persons
involved in decision making. This greater participation would be a
benefit as long as it was managed effectively. As ALCOR operations
expanded we would then see the development of an "executive board"
responsible for day to day operations that would serve at the pleasure
of the Board of Directors.

Thomas Donaldson also makes a distinction between governments and
religious organizations, such as the Catholic Church. This may be a
false dichotomy. The Vatican is in fact a state. If we accept the state
as a model of organization, then the next development would be a
judicial branch. The current move toward creation of a permanent
ombudsman is a step in this direction. But if we look at state
development, it usually comes after the establishment of a judicial
branch. The judicial branch mediates disputes between the other two
branches, in the first instance. The ombudsman is a department of the
legislature that typically assists individuals in finding solutions to
their problems when they can't find a solution using the existing
machinery.

As long as a vast majority of ALCOR members are not suspended, the
problems of organizational governance at ALCOR seem very much like those
faced by current states. I am not suggesting a formal change toward
member election of the Board, but a process by which members make their
opinions know could be of benefit to the Board. It could also promote
more responsible behavior by the members. The suggested member
newsletter is one possibility, but I don't like the idea of an "insider"
vs public information distribution. This would tend to undermine
credibility of the organization. Perhaps a effort to bring more members
on-line would be the best idea in this direction.

David S. Stodolsky                            Tel: + 45 31 95 92 82
Department of Computer Science                Fax: + 45 46 75 42 01
Bldg. 20.1, Roskilde University              Internet: 
Post Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark      or: 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1455