X-Message-Number: 23719
From: "Kitty Antonik Wakfer" <>
Subject: Hoffman's Hubris (ref. Wakfers Wonderment - #23705)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:33:22 -0700

The following message was sent to Rudi soon after I saw his post in the
CryoNet queue, approximately 30 minutes after it appeared there.
From: Kitty Antonik Wakfer [mailto:]
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 10:55 PM
To: Rudi Hoffman
Cc: Paul Wakfer
Subject: Your Message in the CryoNet Queue
Importance: High


Do you understand that you are calling me an outright liar by your message
currently in the CryoNet queue? And just as Aubrey implied, you too are
insulting Paul's integrity by suggesting that he would hide behind by name
in messages to CryoNet. "I am NOT trying to
be arrogant, or even be "right," " - You definitely are *not* trying to be
correct, simply insulting without paying attention to facts exposed in the
exchange between Aubrey and me.

Unless you repudiate your last message with a public apology to both Paul
and me, I *will* definitely have a great deal to say about your apparent
lack of understanding of what you supposedly read in the exchange of
messages between Aubrey and *me*. Despite your attempt to claim that your
message has been presented in a "reasonably friendly way", its contents are
devoid of evidence that this is so.

**Kitty Antonik Wakfer

MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org
Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality
Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org
Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting

Since Rudi has failed to make a repudiation of his undisguised assertions
that I have lied, and to apologize - or to even respond to my email to him,
I can only characterize his behavior as at best comparable to a child who,
unable to present his objections in a reasonable manner, has resorted to the
equivalent of thrown paint or graffiti scrawls on the property of someone
whom he "senses" has wronged him - and then retreats to the shadows.

> Message #23705
> From: 
> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:24:21 EST
> Subject: Wakfers Wonderment

> Paul, who claimed he resigned from this list in disgust some
> weeks ago, must
> be either ghostwriting or helping on these Wakfer writings.

While my last message in response to Aubrey's (# 23682) was 232 bytes too
long for inclusion in the CryoNet #23672 - #23682 digest for Saturday
3/20/04, I would have expected that Rudi was capable of clicking on the link
provided under # 23682 to reach my full message in the archives. Perhaps he
just didn't bother to read it. Otherwise if he did read it, he is definitely
accusing me of being a liar, despite the equivocating beginning to the next
sentence, "I could be wrong  in this,.." So for Rudi's benefit, I repeat
from message #23682:

"I can
only conclude that Aubrey is implying that I - Kitty Antonik Wakfer - am not
the author of the posts being made here, but rather that these have been
ghost written by Paul Antonik Wakfer. .....

"I am not Paul's mouthpiece nor acolyte. I have my own experience and
credentials and a similar 40 years of thought from a similar philosophical
basis. I think my own thoughts and write my own messages, though as we have
made very clear on MoreLife Yahoo, we read each other's writings, serving as
each other's editor - correcting typos and providing clarity/completeness


> The style is EXACTLY Paul Wakfer.  Intelligent, articulate, detailed,

By such utterances, Rudi has made it very clear that he does not think that
I (a woman) can be "intelligent, articulate [and] detailed". It would seem
that Rudi has a very low opinion of the capability of women; possibly that
is because of his of limited exposure to women who are intelligent,
articulate and detailed *and* who do not hesitate to speak out when they see
or read of errors in ethical behavior, despite the worthiness of the goals
expressed. It also appears not to have occurred to Rudi that Paul would not
be romantically attracted to a woman who was *not* intelligent, articulate
and detailed; that should lead one to question the type of women that Rudi
finds attractive.

> I don't mean to become a target of Paul and Kitty Wakfer.  And, as an
> example, I will NOT respond or try to be "right" about this.

No, Rudi simply does the equivalent of throwing paint or scrawling
graffiti - and runs. And to use "right" instead of simply the word without "
", Rudi makes it clear that he doesn't think of right and wrong, just how to
"get along".

> In
> fact, I should
> probably do what would be a good example and simply email this
> personally without
> further cluttering this forum.

That is exactly what Rudi should have done, unless of course he had some
evidence that I was not being truthful, or was being misleading in what I
wrote in #23682 - or any message.


> But, may I suggest again, many of my fellow futurenauts would do
> well to read
> "How to Win Friends and Influence People" or take a Dale Carnegie
> course.
> (Heck, _I need to read it again because it is SO easy to forget
> basics in human
> relations!)  Because it is not enough to be "right."  If we are
> to get along
> and enjoy each other, it is sometimes helpful to simply be bigger
> than an issue
> which has the power to permanently destroy relationships.  We
> must master not
> just the facts, but the challenge of what facts are worthy of
> damaging future
> collaborations.

For Rudi's information, I took the Dale Carnegie course some 33 years ago.
(I still have the completion certificate and will provide a .jpg for him
should he think me a liar about that too. Unfortunately I no longer have the
pen that was awarded me as the most improved in my class.) While Rudi
apparently thinks that  *the* method for "influencing people" is simply
being friendly and neighborly while avoiding references to their wrong
behavior, this was not the message I got from that course at all. The truth
is vitally important and failure to adhere to it should be addressed
directly, which does not mean with violence, or even insults. Paul and I
have and continue to offer our help to anyone who wants to provide sincere,
enthusiastic, non-misleading messages for the purpose of gathering support,
whether it be in the area of anti-aging research or cryonics.


>  And I happen to agree with much of what I
> understand of
> your ideologies.

There is nothing that Rudi has written in his message (and little in others)
to show that he understands *any* of the philosophical principles by which
Paul and I live our lives, including writing the many things that we do on
the Self-Sovereign Individual Project, MoreLife and elsewhere - such as here
at CryoNet.

Rudi failed to comprehend the purpose of the messages I wrote, especially
the last in which I also provided suggestions of how Aubrey could be
completely factual while educating his listeners/readers. Instead, Rudi
spits out:
>In short, stop pissing people off just to prove how smart you are and that
you can do it..<snip>

I can only conclude that if Rudi does not understand what he has read and/or
is not capable of formulating an articulate response to specifics which
arouse a sense of discomfort for him, he then resorts to accusing the writer
of merely trying to "prove how smart [she is]".
At this point, I will add for Rudy's benefit, the meaning of "hubris" in the
subject line of this message. It refers to the presumptuousness and rashness
of his numerous statements regarding me, and also Paul, which bear no
relationship to the truth - but then he has already made it clear that truth
is, at the most, a minor value to him.

It's almost laughable (except that I take no enjoyment in witnessing
foolishness) that Rudi closes his message with "Warmly and Sincerely Yours",
leaving the hypocrisy waving like a flag in the wind. But then this too
demonstrates Rudi's emphasis on being friendly and neighborly while being
severely lacking in respect for the truth.

**Kitty Antonik Wakfer

MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org
Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality
Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org
Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23719