X-Message-Number: 29976
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 04:16:02 -0400
From: "Charles Platt" <>
Subject: Response to Flavonoid

Flavonoid is of course correct regarding different types of
nonprofits. I deliberately chose membership organizations when
checking for their assignment of voting privileges, so that they would
be comparable to Alcor.

But what if Alcor did reclassify itself as a non-membership
organization? I believe this would create additional problems. For
instance, the IRS says that a 501(c)(3) foundation cannot engage in
fee-for-service transactions. But this is precisely what dealings with
"clients" would suggest. Remember, a 501(c)(3) such as Alcor is
primarily supposed to be advancing knowledge and educating the public.
I think to protect its status, Alcor has to call its members
"members."

And in any case, declassifying them would be a step away from the
model which is considered preferable. The members are supposed to
serve as a substitute for shareholders. Just as shareholders
supposedly provide some control and feedback to limit the self
indulgence of directors in a for-profit corporation, members with
voting power should limit the excesses of directors in a nonprofit.

That's the theory, anyway. And as previously noted, it is the practice
at Cryonics Institute.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29976