X-Message-Number: 30577
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 00:37:14 -0700
From: "Finance Department" <>
Subject: With Alcor members like these, who needs member rights?

Content-Disposition: inline

People never cease to amaze me.  A handful of folks have been trying to go
to bat for Alcor members' rights, and what do they get from most?  Silence.
What do they get from a separate handful of folks like Tim Freeman and
Joseph Morgan (presumbably Alcor members)?  Chided for not being cheerful
and cooperative, and yes-sir-ing the dictators, oh and of course don't use
pseudonyms - be sure they know who you are so they can step on you.  It's
just so nasty to say you want to become more involved with Alcor.  I guess
that makes CI an organization totally full of "nasty" people, who can be
just about as involved as they want to be with theirs, so I'm told,
including running for their board positions and of course being able to

Alcor, though, seems to have gotten to the place where it is today, not due
only to a handful of board members who have dug in and will not budge, but
mainly to 800 some members most of whom who really don't give a damn.  They
view purchasing cryonics on the same level as purchasing a Chevrolet.  They
are "customers" not "members".

And as to "negativity," Alcor critics have put forward a number of possible
reforms but the Board does not seem to be interested in any kind of
membership participation.  So who's da "negative" factor, really?

Then we also have thoughts from across the sea from Alcor:  I wonder if Alan
Sinclair can give some specific examples of superb performance of current
Alcor management. The reason why he singles out the Chamberlains is because
they closed the Alcor UK building and he is still bitter about it. He may be
right about that but it colors his views of post-Chamberlain management; i.e,
anything must be better than that.  But that ain't necessariy so.  The UK
situation was just one issue, and look at all the disasters since then with
other management at the helm - everything from unfunded PR disasters to
outright major theft, as delineated well by Pizer in other posts.

I don't know what the best answer to all this is.  Perhaps to just let the
status quo advocates win the war.  The refugees from the other side can take
a walk and do have other options, as one of the board members was reported
to have smugly, impudently and arrogantly suggested.  Should caring Alcor
members just walk?  Or are there other options to pursue?



 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30577