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