X-Message-Number: 31013
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: Warning for All Cryonicists
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 10:58:20 +0200
References: <>

--Apple-Mail-14--540551511
	format=flowed;
	delsp=yes


On 2 Sep 2008, at 11:00, John de Rivaz wrote:

> What is also needed is some tangible benefit for membership that is  
> worth having in its own right.

That is the point of the "current' benefits" mentioned.


>
> The lawyers consulted would probably say that this is life insurance  
> by another name

Then they would have to say the same about foundations/churches/etc.


>
> Also, it is attractive to people whose 10% of income is small, and  
> unattractive to those whose 10% is large.

Since large incomes are typically taxed at a higher percentage, the  
reverse would be true.


>
>  Bear in mind that to be successful it would have be marketed to  
> people who are new to the idea of cryonics.

This has been disconfirmed by private emails.



The original starting point for my proposal was, "How to get the  
cryonics movement to the point where it cannot be destroyed by a  
rampaging government official or someone with a few hand grenades?"  
That is, how to deal the with the political risk that will be  
encountered before cryonics reaches widespread acceptance. The answer  
was to develop a marketing strategy that would increase membership by  
hundreds at a time, not by one's or two's. The repackaging would also  
open up the overwhelming majority of the potential market that will  
never be reached by current efforts. Finally, I illustrated how  
political acceptance could be achieved in a smaller jurisdiction by  
electing cryonicists to government posts and thereby ensuring that in  
that jurisdiction suspension would be an option that could be carried  
out as a routine hospital procedure. Therefore, the approach would  
benefit all cryonicists, both active and suspended.

My reanalysis of the Badger data showed that the long held belief that  
a demonstration of human revival would lead to widespread acceptance  
of cryonics is wrong. In the short term, both the risks to and  
acceptance of cryonics can only be changed by a new marketing  
approach. This is what I was referring to when I asked, "Is there  
someone who can shake loose the money" to try a new approach to  
increasing the growth rate of the cryonics movement. The current  
technology of cryo-preservation is entirely adequate to convince  
anyone, that isn't ideologically opposed to cryonics, that it has a  
chance of working. It is clear from recent discussions, however, that  
millions continue to be spent on this research direction. Not to  
mention that a lot of this money seems to have been wasted.

The Badger survey also showed that many people simply don't believe  
that a cryonics organization will continue to exist long enough to  
revive them. Thus, the institutional barrier is often what is  
preventing people from signing up. Therefore, there are both  
institutional and political considerations which suggest it would be  
wise to fund an alternative approach.




dss


  Skype: davidstodolsky




--Apple-Mail-14--540551511

 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31013