X-Message-Number: 15169
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 05:56:17 -0500
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: what Platt says that is correct

Hi everyone!

While I have many disagreements on details with Charles Platt, and
would among other things disagree with him about the state of
cryonics, I must agree strongly with him on one point. At one
time Alcor published much more critical material about itself
and its activities. Much of this did not occur 
in the magazine (which came out every other month) but instead
in the part which looked at Alcor in particular ... the old
newsletter about events in cryonics, separate from CRYONICS.

It doesn't really matter how this is done, but Alcor in particular
should spend at least as much time as it used to on its 
problems. Yes, if you are close to those who manage Alcor, you
will know of such things, but that's hardly the best situation
if you AREN'T. The Chamberlains have instituted a variety of 
changes when they became head of Alcor once more; their failure
to keep something like a newsletter for members which quite
explicitly discussed just what was going wrong is one of the 
worse decisions they made.

Finally, while I cannot give Charles Platt the kind of sense 
he wants about a cryonics society, he should NOT have left. As
someone who rarely speaks up, and then only with criticisms 
(some of which are quite valid!), Charles Platt is useless unless
he's also willing to be a member of some operating cryonics 
society. Otherwise whatever he says is easy to exclude simply
as the nattering of a nonmember.

		Best wishes and long long life to all,

			Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15169