X-Message-Number: 23685
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 04:12:01 -0800
Subject: Re: kennita's plan
From: Kennita Watson <>

Charles Platt <> wrote:
> Kennita Watson writes:
>
> "I plan to attend the 2005 Frozen Dead Guy Days, with as high
> a profile as I can manage, because I actually think it will
> be *good* for cryonics."
>
> This is a classic example of the kind of thing that just
> makes me want to give up and walk away. I have had experience
> doing PR, and I believe the other person who patiently took
> the time to explain some fundamentals to Kennita also has
> experience. In response, we find an absolute and total
> uninterest in listening to anyone's advice.

You'd like to think so ;-) .  I've listened, and I've read, and
I've discussed (privately) with list members and non-list members,
and I think you're wrong.  (Meta-discussion:  in my time I've
found it amusing how often people have written for themselves the
equation "they don't agree with me" == "they're not listening" :-) .)

>  It doesn't matter
> if arguments are logical, based on extensive experience, and
> are merely advocating caution. There will be no additional
> thought. SKennitaknows what she knows and she is going to do
> what she wants to do, period.

It matters.  However, I don't find the arguments compelling
(It's too late at night for me to pull out my list of
logical fallacies).  Extensive experience?  I must admit that
I don't know how many successful PR campaigns you've run,
what their goals were, how you measured success, etc.  You
don't seem to be "merely advocating caution".  To me your
tone comes off as a panicked "ABANDON EVERYTHING!!!".

"There will be no additional thought" sounds to me like a
petulant and provocative statement.  I'll simply state that
I am thinking and will continue to think.  I plan to refine
and hone my message, and to get feedback on the best ways
to deal with difficult people.  You're welcome to help if
you want.

> Kennita, I wouldn't give a damn, except that you are
> screwing with my life. I have already presented you with the
> best possible evidence that people who do wacky stuff (such
> as freezing your father in the back yard without getting
> permission, as a result of which the town outlaws cryonics)
> are NOT HELPFUL to everyone else.

Attending the Frozen Dead Guy Days is not "wacky".  Pointing
out to people I talk to that getting permission is a good idea
is a good idea, and will go into my "dealing with people" files.

> An Arizona legislator
> mentioned a similar case as "evidence" that all cryonics is a
> sham, and therefore should be regulated into oblivion.

One purpose of PR is to see to it that that doesn't happen.
Avoiding PR entirely means that only the negative messages
get out.

> He is
> not the only person who thinks this way. Why do you want to
> give more ammunition to our enemies?

Maybe part of the problem is thinking of them as our enemies.
As Worf once said, "A siege mentality is ultimately self-defeating."

Maybe those people who attack us really do think that cryonics is
a sham, and that people are being bilked out of their money.  Our
mission, should we choose to accept it, is to disabuse them of
that notion, which we can't do if we won't talk to them.
>
> Additional publicity for Trygve Bauge has a very real risk of
> damaging the credibility of this field and inviting hostile
> legislation.

What kind of publicity exactly?  How large a risk?  What
legislation (who's to say we don't want to invite the proposal
of such legislation so we can shoot it down and create some
positive precedents -- just a thought)?

Truth to tell, I don't think my going to the Frozen Dead Guy
Days, with or without the blessing of the mainstream cryonics
organizations, will make any measurable difference in how much
publicity Trygve gets.

> Why do you think you are so unique that you can
> somehow turn it all around and prove positive results? What
> gives you this idea?

I am indeed unique -- you got a problem wit' dat? ;-)
Seriously, maybe because I try something you haven't tried.
And because I'm not trying to "turn it all around" (which
for one thing makes it sound like it's all bad now --
lighten up!).  I plan to attend one event and make a positive
impression on some people, though of course I'm not certain
how well I'll do.  I'll prove the positive results when I
get them (assuming I can think of something I can measure to
provide the proof).

BTW, one place I got "this idea" was by running for the
Secretary of State of California as a Libertarian and getting
higher-than-average vote totals with very little money.
"Higher-than-average" was 3%, so I know also how to deal
with disappointment.  But I digress.

> What right do you have to take that
> chance, since we have already seen that it is likely to
> endanger our field?

I think this is referred to as "catastrophizing" in my
books on depression.  Your definition of "likely", not
mine.  And another mysterious "it/that chance", like the
monster under the bed.

Enough -- I need sleep.

Live long and prosper,
Kennita
--
Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery;
none but ourselves can free our minds.
           -- Bob Marley, "Redemption Song"

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23685