X-Message-Number: 1862
From: 
Subject: CRYONICS
Date: Mon,  1 Mar 93 22:29:37 PST

 
From:  Ralph Whelan


     This brief message is in response to Charles Platt's recent 
response to MY earlier posting about staff salaries, volunteers, 
etc.  This posting is in defense of my true position, which 
apparently was either poorly presented by myself, or 
misinterpreted by Charles.  This posting should under NO 
circumstances be seen as an attack on Charles.

     Charles says,
 
>I know for a fact that there are literally scores of 
>Alcorians within a one-hour drive from Riverside. I cannot 
>believe that none of these people would respond, if, for 
>instance, Derek stopped signing people up for a day or two 
>and made begging phone calls instead. 
 
     First, as I said in the posting to which Charles is 
responding, there are NOT scores of Alcorians within a one-hour 
drive from Riverside.  There are almost NONE.  The scores of 
Alcorians he refers to are in the L.A. region, from 75 to 100 
minutes away by car, assuming no traffic.  If any of them 
attempted to make the drive on a weeknight, they would spend a 
bare minimum of three hours on the road (two hours on the way 
here, one hour on the way back).  This may sound like 
hair-splitting, but there is a BIG difference between spending 
three hours (and 3/4 of a tank of gas) on the road, and, say, 
spending an hour or less, when your ultimate goal is to give away 
your time and effort.  There are maybe 12 Alcorians within one 
hour of Alcor, and seven of them are on the staff!

     But regardless of the distance, I AGREE with Charles' basic 
point that many of these members would respond to a direct 
request for help.  This is why I'm working on a detailed 
volunteer involvement package (with Charles!).  The point of my 
posting was that the sorts of jobs these volunteers will be doing 
(see the very Volunteer Task Listing in Cryonics to which Charles 
refers) won't help our cash flow situation one bit, and won't 
lessen the demand for full-time, on-site staffers.  Remember, the 
point of my message was that even if we maximize our potential 
for volunteer help, we won't lessen our need for staff at all, 
and in fact we're likely to create MORE work for the staff.  
(Though this certainly is not a reason to RESIST such assistance.) 

     Did this point not come across?

>One last point. I understand that the previous administration 
>was not receptive to the idea of an outsider such as myself 
>representing Alcor to the media--giving radio interviews, 
>sending out info packets, or whatever. . . .
 
>On the other hand, now that it has been allowed to happen, it 
>seems as if it might be workable after all. In a one-week 

>total of approximately two hours on the phone. This isn't 
>much, but it is certainly a measurable contribution. And 
>while I don't give interviews that are as succinct as the 
>ones which Carlos used to give, I think I did an adequate 
>job. Thus, something which was thought to be impossible has 
>turned out to be possible after all. 
 
>Maybe Ralph is right, and my situation is singular. Maybe it 
>cannot be replicated. But I still have difficulty believing 
>this. 
 
     Charles, did my posting reach you intact?  Your situation is 
far from singular, and I can't think of anything in my original 
message which would've implied that it is (though I certainly 
indicated that you are uniquely competent and dedicated).  And by 
whom was such a situation "thought to be impossible"?  Are you 
simply creating a straw man to illustrate your point, or is there 
something I don't know about?  When the subject of you acting as 
P.R. representative for Alcor first came up, I suggested waiting 
a few weeks for a simple and explicit reason, which you seemed to 
agree with, and which is now behind us.  I certainly don't want 
to cause any strife between us, but at the same time I don't want 
to be represented on Cryonet as having been hard to convince on 
this issue, or otherwise as having held a position different from 
that which I've in fact held.  You start your message by saying 
you wish to "take issue with one point."  What is that point?  I 
can't see anything in your posting that contradicts my own.  

     Relentlessly,

     Ralph

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1862