X-Message-Number: 30474
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:15:32 -0700
From: hkhenson <>
Subject: Distorting the past (was kidnapped)
References: <>

At 03:00 AM 2/14/2008, David Pizer wrote:

snip

Dave and I have been on the same side of several battles, but I am 
not going to let him get away with this much distortion of the 
past.  It's too important to be as accurate as possible.  If any of 
you see me getting something wrong, please jump on it.

>That meant that after 1987 Directors no longer had to
>appear each year in front of the members they were
>supposed to be serving and ask the members to examine
>their record from the year before and either re-elect
>them or elect some better candidates.  In 1987 the
>Directors were no longer accountable to the members -
>and in 1988 all hell broke loose.
>
>In 1988 Directors began doing things as if they had to
>account to no one.  They brought

Anyone who knows anything about business organization should spot 
this.  Directors, as directors, don't do operational 
things.  Officers and the staff do.  Now in those days when Alcor was 
much smaller, there was considerable overlap between operational 
people and directors, but *as directors* they couldn't make decisions 
like this.  The president/CEO did.

>a terminal patient

Dora Kent.  See the section on controversies here 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcor_Life_Extension_Foundation

>into the Alcor facility and allowed her to die there,
>instead of allowing her to die in a neutral place like
>a hospice in front of non-partial observers.

Why was this done?  Who was it done for?  And who made the 
decision?  It's not like you don't know, *you were there.*

snip

> From that point on, things got worse.  First the
>Directors starting fighting with local officials and
>bureaucrats.

You are trying to make it sound like it was a board of directors 
decision to go pick a fight.  Far from it.  Again, you were there and 
know even in more detail than I do what happened.

>After a few years of that they started
>fighting with their own members until a large amount
>of members quit and started their own company.

At the time, most of the people who followed a certain person away 
from Alcor could not understand why Alcor would have nothing to do 
with him and those in Alcor who knew didn't, couldn't for the sake of 
the patients, enlighten them.  The reason eventually became public.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/?sty=10636

snip

>Alcor's President and main Board member Carlos
>Mondragon acted so unaccountable that he finally had
>to be forced out of office and Steve Bridge brought
>in,

snip

Dave, do you remember how you voted on replacing Carlos?  And why 
Carlos was replaced?  And how that went sour for the people who 
forced Carlos out?

Times change and the principle involved settled his problems and is 
now on the board.  I don't really want to rake up the details, but I 
am seriously tempted to post that recorded board meeting to remind 
you.  Maybe I will just send it to you by email.

snip

>What is this simple change that can prevent Directors
>from making mistakes and causing    problems,

snip

As I pointed out above, directors can't really do much except set 
policy and hire and fire the CEO.  Today none of them work at Alcor.

I don't see this idea of electing directors as having noticeable 
effect on the wisdom of other groups that do it that way.

Even in the cryonics world I don't see it.  ACS and CI both have 
elected boards.  CryoCare did.  I was elected to and served on the 
ACS board for a while and it sure didn't improve my wisdom.

Keith

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30474