X-Message-Number: 22402
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 01:41:21 EDT
Subject: Re: CryoNet #22389 - #22395

I also want to express my appreciation for the background and clarifications 
provided by  Bridge, Pizer, and especially Platt regarding the Larry Johnson 
saga. I had first gone to  Rick Potvin's web site to review a dialog involving 
Platt, Johnson, and others that took place a month or two prior to LJ's 
resignation.  That discussion involved the issue of professionalization which 

remains very germaine.  I think it is a great and continuing worry that we 
depend so 
much on the energies and perseverence of committed individuals who yet have 

other lives they want to live prior to their moment of extreme need.   From the
accounts provided, it seems that everything about Larry was a dream come true 
until, suddenly it was a nightmare.  Nevertheless, if the lesson we draw is 
to forget about professionalism, then I think we draw the wrong lesson.  Our 
survival as cryonics organizations depends upon growth, growth in memberships, 
growth in facilities, growth in the strength of our endowments, growth in our 
capacities across the board.  This won't happen just through the enthusiasm of 
a bunch of amateurs and part timers.
I think we need to look beyond our anger and shock at the apostasism and 

perversity of Larry to consider in more detail what was wrong with the set-up 
motivated him to leave.  My first thought was that he had deliberately 

deceived us in a carefully planned plot to seize photos and other artifacts on 
TW to 
make a windfall profit through sale to SI or more plausibly the National 

Inquirer or some such.  Clearly that is the path he is on now, but, from Platt's
description, it is just as clear to me that my original conspiracy theory 

doesn't hold water.  This guy came in with the more or less sincere intention of
making a nice career for himself in Cryonics.  However, the career he had in 

mind apparently was a financially rewarding career having nothing much to do 
believing in our cause.  He did give lip service to the cause as he realized 
was required of his new role but he didn't come to ALCOR on that basis nor 

should we expect other cooperating professionals we bring on board in the future
to have such beliefs.  
What he did come with was the expectation that there was a financial and 
career opportunity here, a reasonable expectation given the enormous publicity 

which resulted from the TW affair.  There is always that prospect lurking in the
wings.  We all think that some day some how this thing is going to take off.  
Note that all the cryonics organizations that have any service capacity at 
all are in the United States.  I think that this is partly to do with the fact 
that the US is such a beehive of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship involves 
creativity, initiative, and innovativeness, but it is also and perhaps most 

importantly about aquisitiveness, i.e. raw greed, the dazzling promise of 
profits.  Somewhere in the future there are going to be windfall profits in 
Cryonics, but not tomorrow or the next day. Forty years of struggle on a very 
bumpy growth curve has taught us that. My guess is that in going around and 

familiarizing himself with our little cryonics world, it gradually dawned on our
professional pal Larry that this wasn't going to happen today, tomorrow or the 
next day.
I speculate that he might have asked for a big raise under the circumstances 
and got turned down or maybe he just decided to make his exit without 

prompting, having brainstormed another money making venture.  (I agree that a 
check might be in order.)
In closing, I urge my colleagues on and off the cryonet to continue 

discussing the two issues which emerge for me from this messy affair. Number 
professionalization and number two, commercialization.  Sooner or later we are 

going to have to come up with more satisfactory answers on both these counts, 
this applies to ALCOR, CI, ACS, SAI and anybody else involved in our little 
Ron Havelock, CI member

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22402