X-Message-Number: 1870 From: (Thomas Donaldson) Subject: Re: cryonics: #1832-#1838 Date: Mon, 1 Mar 93 22:20:19 PST To Clarissa: I think that the discussion about whether or not Alcor should literally expell people, and refuse to suspend them, has a lot of merit. Fundamentally I would side with you, though there are people (none of whom to my knowledge have arranged to be suspended!) whose suspension might create a general danger to Alcor. However, since you only started posting messages recently, I think it might be helpful to give a bit of history. I was not a witness to these events, and those who were have been very close-mouthed about it---but the history might explain just how this subject really seems to have arisen (so far as I recall, as someone who has been receiving the CRYONICS POSTINGS for some time, no such discussion occurred before these events). AS I recall, a very new member of Alcor volunteered to help with publicity on the East Coast last year. There was a suspension there; as you might guess, most people whose relatives need suspension aren't in a fit state to engage in long discussions with the press about its merits. But this new member proceeded to inform the Press (contrary to explicit arrangements Alcor had made with these people) about the suspension and the name of the suspendee. This turned into very bad publicity for Alcor, as you might guess. The saga continued: the new member then put quite a number of postings on the net, and mailings to known members, not only justifying his action but also making statements about actions of Board members, etc. Most of these (as I understand) were eventually proven false, but at the cost of a BIG rise in mutual misunderstanding within Alcor. This person disappeared from net postings and (I am told) resigned from Alcor. This was the first time I personally can remember when any actual suspension member of Alcor had done something other members felt was seriously damaging to Alcor. Naturally, the general question of what to do in such cases immediately came to the fore. And since the discussion was general rather than particular, all kinds of scenarios, far worse than the incidents I've just discussed, were naturally put forward for consideration. So should we suspend any member? What about .... and rather than provide examples for you, you are invited to think up your own paranoid scenarios. And it is true that Alcor is a small group, and unlike (say) the US government is in no position at all to tough out threats or literal physical attacks, legal or illegal. I too sympathize strongly with the idea of freezing ANY suspension member. But if I start to imagine scenarios for members who I would NOT want to be frozen, I (I have a vivid and wild imagination, when I use it) don't find it hard to imagine cases in which I would not want Alcor to freeze someone. What about current members or nonmembers, especially because Alcor has recently seen a greeat deal of internal argument? You will have to ask the people involved just who they have in mind, but so far as I know (perhaps I'm innocent, yes) there is no prominent personality in Alcor or associated with Alcor in the past who is felt by anyone as someone who should not be suspended. Finally I do want to point out that this history I provide comes largely from reports of OTHERS. Other than mailings from this individual, I have personally experienced very little; so if others want to correct this history (with FACTS, please, not just with CLAIMS) they are certainly invited to do so. (Please notice I began it with a shortened version of just this statement, too). The subject bears thinking about just like other unpleasant truths which question an easy morality bear thinking about. Finally, it seems to me that the issues you raise should be addressed, regardless of who you are. I hope that others in these converssations will decide that too, but of course I have no control over their actions nor they over mine. Best and long long life, Thomas Donaldson -- Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1870