X-Message-Number: 30056 References: <> From: David Stodolsky <> Subject: Re: Stodolsky questions Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 20:30:04 +0100 On 22 Nov 2007, at 20:54, wrote: > David Stodolsky first quoted me in part, > > >>> Oh, boy. Talk about not paying attention. First of all, >>> professional >>> marketers--with or without doctorates in a social science--as far >>> as I have been >>> able to ascertain, have a very poor record of results. > and then wrote: > >> Well, in the 1970's I published a letter in Long Life Mag. saying >> that cryonics organizations had to consider political issues. The >> only response to this was a letter opposing the idea - that is, >> until >> the Dora Kent case 12 years later. > > _http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=66_ > (http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=66) > > He also wrote: > >> Now contact with and support for favorable politicians is a routine >> part of organizational activity. So, let's hope that we don't need a >> disaster like the Dora Kent case, before people realize that >> investing in social research is appropriate. > > Well, I realize I'm not so swift these days, but I still think I > can follow > an argument, if it isn't too technical in an unfamiliar field. But > what point > is he trying to make? That in 1977 he foresaw dangers that others > didn't, > and that would have prevented the Dora Kent problems? > > Lots of others foresaw the dangers, which were and are obvious. > But what was > to be done with the resources available? In the cited cryonet > archive he > says Alcor spent $100,000 in legal costs, which could have been > used to win the > election of a different coroner. Can he be serious? Was Alcor > supposed to > divine in advance that this coroner would be the next serious > problem and pour > money into electing someone else? As they say, get real. If ALCOR's survival was critically dependent on the coroner, then a political view of the situation would mean that you proactively meet with that individual and determine if s/he is non-hostile or can be made non-hostile by a reasonable campaign contribution. This is what ALCOR is doing right now with the business and political system at its present location. Totally rejecting any political involvement was the attitude in this earlier period. This was clearly a mistake and a similar one is being repeated right now by ignoring the macro- political/cultural challenge the movement must eventually overcome. I am not just talking about a more effective marketing strategy. The whole social framework must be evaluated before an effective socio- political strategy can be developed. Even with the current growth rates, the cryonics movement will become a major political force with tens or hundreds of millions of members within 40 years. It would be utopian to assume that there will not be a confrontation with the dominant forces in society, before cryonics is widely accepted. > > Incidentally, it could be argued that the Dora Kent incident was > by no means > a disaster. On the contrary, Alcor won the legal battles and a > growth spurt > followed. It would have been a lot less expensive, if the problem had been approached proactively. If not for the utter incompetence of the coroner, the result could have been a lot worse. With today's political climate, you could expect a SWAT team and the routine application of stun grenades, etc. if there was a raid. > > > That aside, I read the cited 1977 post, and found this as the gist > of his > main sspecific proposal: > > >> What I propose is that research be initiated using a >> list like this as a base for constructing a "journal". >> This journal could be elaborated into a mechanism >> that fulfils the information distribution function for >> an organization. The software developed could be >> used by Life Extension Movement organizations >> both to to enhance their own credibility and protect >> themselves from penetrations by hostile agents. >> Some comment in this direction have appeared on >> the mailing list. "[Christopher Fry] mentioned that if >> he (personally) had a billion dollars to spend, he >> would spend it on information access . . . (CML35)" > > O.K., nothing wrong with that, if within reach, as many others knew > and > said. However, 1977 was a little early for economically available > web sites or > for many readers. That proposal only required email, which already had more than a decade of practical application behind it. In any case, you don't wait to start a research and development project until the application is economically feasible. Most new research findings take over 10 years to reach the point of commercial viability, even if they are fabulous improvements over current technology. This List has become less and less a place where the leaders of the movement participate in info exchange. A higher quality and broader readership would have been attained, if the proposal above had been implemented. The ad hoc changes that have been made necessary by abusive postings would have been avoided. The proposed system has been peer-reviewed and there has been an implementation attempt by an independent researcher: Extended abstract: Stodolsky, D. S. (2002). Computer-network based democracy: Scientific communication as a basis for governance. Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Knowledge Management in e-Government, 7, 127-137. http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$14 Comprehensive Stodolsky, D. S. (1995). Consensus Journals: Invitational journals based upon peer review. The Information Society, 11(4). [1994 version in N. P. Gleditsch, P. H. Enckell, & J. Burchardt (Eds.), Det videnskabelige tidsskrift (The scientific journal) (pp. 151-160). Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. (Tema NORD 1994: 574)] http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$19 The latest (includes citation to an implementation attempt): Stodolsky, D. (2002). Scientific publication needs a peer consensus. Psycoloquy, 13(2). http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$20 Discussion of organizational impacts of the system: Stodolsky, D. (1994). Telematic journals and organizational control: Integrity, authority, and self-regulation. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 2(1). <http://www.helsinki.fi/science/optek/1994/n1/stodolsk.txt> dss David Stodolsky Skype: davidstodolsky Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30056