X-Message-Number: 22564 Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:06:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Charles Platt <> Subject: John Grigg I regret that my friend John Grigg is now following in the footsteps of Sports Illustrated, The Associated Press, and The Arizona Republic by focusing public attention on a private memo which I wrote primarily for Alcor's directors. The difference is that John claims to be personally concerned about JL (I am referring to him by his initials to prevent this message from popping up in the future, if someone types the name of Alcor's CEO into a search engine). Since JL will not be working fulltime at Alcor after the end of this year and presumably will be looking for a job elsewhere, I suspect he might prefer the "memo issue" to disappear instead of being dug up all over again. Did you consider this possibility, John? I think it is especially bizarre that you would want me to publish the entire thing. I suggest you ask JL how he feels about this. In fact, since he has his own copy, why not ask *him* to publish it if you think this would be a good idea. Personally I feel that the text is no longer relevant since JL has announced his resignation. This, surely, is the end of the story--or it should be. Now I have a few things to say about my own position. I am quite willing to admit faults and flaws, but I am not at all willing to admit or ignore accusations that are unflattering, inaccurate, and pejorative. First by implication you impugn my motives. John, why do you imagine I would spend two weeks writing something, completely unpaid, for the directors of an organization to which I have devoted a huge amount of time and love? Do you really imagine it was an exercise in petty malice? Wouldn't it make sense that I must have a great personal investment in Alcor, and therefore my primary objective at all times is to protect it and its patients, regardless of any personal feelings that I may have about other people, positive or negative? I put about 9 months of my life into Alcor. Others have put in much more, but I am at an age where time is precious and I cannot expect to possess youthful vitality indefinitely. This was a very big commitment for me, especially since I took responsibility for case work, for which I was not ideally qualified. The stress level was such that I had to use anti-anxiety medication on a regular basis, and I had recurring nightmares. I completed the six months that I had promised, and during the course of that time I more than tripled the number of people available to do standbys. If this hadn't happened, Alcor would have been unable to do standbys lasting more than 4 or 5 days, depending on the availability of volunteers. I also made a lot of other changes in other areas, and I ran five cases, none of which contained significant errors. Maybe I was just lucky, but either way I think this is a very unusual record. I'm proud of what I achieved, and I am protective of it. From my actions (which should speak louder than words, if there is any fairness at all) you should see why I get really pissed when someone such as yourself suggests that I may have cheap personal motives. It is pejorative and inappropriate to describe me as pursuing a "vendetta." JL has been unfailingly polite and decent to me, and gave me a lot of support during my first six months at Alcor. I have no personal grudge against him and have made this clear numerous times. You ask if JL was asked to leave or if he quit of his own volition. Again, you don't seem to consider the feelings of the person whom you claim to be defending. He may not appreciate the suspicion and doubt that your question could create. Also, I am not a director and was not present at the meeting where JL submitted his resignation. So why ask me? If you really want to know the answer, you can ask JL himself. I encourage you to do this privately. You suggest it was tactless of me to send him a copy of what I wrote. This again shows that you have not taken the time to think about the issue from his point of view. Maybe it will be clearer if I restate it from *your* point of view. Suppose I wrote something about you, John. If I am a fair and decent person, don't you think I should give you an immediate opportunity to correct any errors which I might have made? Also, shouldn't I share the text with you, so that you don't have to wonder what people are saying behind your back? This is a matter of professional decency and courtesy. It is also a matter of being honest. Regarding your own evaluation of Alcor staff and management, I must point out that you have only visited the facility a couple of times, and you lack sufficient information to be an objective observer. Your perceptions do not match the reality that I experienced. As for my reasons for quitting membership, I prefer not to go into the specific details one by one, but I have made it very clear that for me, membership is less important than the satisfaction I derive from activism. Why can't you accept this? Also, when I quit from Alcor in 1992, I don't recall any questions being asked, or any fuss. Therefore I did not expect things to be substantially different this time. To suggest that I was trying to make a big statement is grossly misleading. My CryoNet post was calm, factual, and brief. Finally you question my judgment in trusting Larry Johnson. I have already pointed out that he saved two of our cases from a far worse outcome than would have been achieved otherwise. He was a good paramedic and he did what he said he would do for us--up to a point where I believe he privately changed his outlook. I am not excusing his subsequent acts in any way. I was horrified to find that my own informal words had been taped by Larry without my knowledge or consent. But if you think you could have predicted what was going to happen when Larry was hired, I simply don't believe it. Everyone trusted him absolutely, and no one had a critical word to say about him. Is your judgment really so much better than theirs? In addition you seem to think that I had the authority to hire Larry Johnson all on my own. JL and Michael Riskin spent time with Larry when he first visited Alcor for his interview, and their agreement was necessary before the decision to hire Larry was submitted to the board for their approval. I willingly admit that I selected Larry Johnson's resume, but I repeat: I did not have authority to hire him. Regarding my decision to share my JL memo with Johnson, there were excellent reasons for doing so. Larry at that time was the #1 person responsible for clinical services. He needed to be fully informed in order to do his job. Moreover, for reasons which do not concern us here, he had threatened to quit just four weeks previously, and I felt he might leave if I didn't level with him. Of course in reality he was going to leave anyway, but at the time, I desperately wanted him to maintain our field capability. Now for the bottom line. I have been reluctant to get into this, because I hoped it was self-evident. But since my integrity has been questioned, I will respond. The memo I wrote was not centrally important to the seven-page story that appeared in Sports Illustrated. Think about it, John. There were seven pages, in which maybe five or six sentences referred to me. Obviously the feature could have been published without me and without the memo. In reality the memo was just the icing on the cake. The cake itself--the real substance of the story, which made it worth publishing--was supplied entirely through the actions, inactions, errors, and omissions of other people. They have chosen to remain silent, and I must emphasize that I respect their right to do so. What I do not respect is someone leaping to the facile, thoughtless conclusion that I am the bad guy just because I am the only one who has admitted an error. If you are really concerned about the Sports Illustrated story and everything that followed from it, by all means include me as someone who unwittingly facilitated it, but do not blame me as being the primary enabler. Better still, for the sake of Alcor, JL, and the rest of us who are quite sick of this whole topic, I suggest you should stop blaming people altogether. --Charles Platt Footnote: I am assuming that a message with the name "John Grigg" in the header did in fact originate entirely from John Grigg. A friend of mine who is perhaps less trusting than I am has suggested that since the message is uncharacteristic of John and contains none of his usual stylistic mannerisms (lol), an unnamed collaborator may have been involved. John, I know that you are a truthful person. Can you assure us that you wrote every word of your message without any encouragement or collaboration from anyone else? If in fact another person collaborated in some way, may we know who it was? Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22564