X-Message-Number: 3149
Date:  Fri, 16 Sep 94 15:05:29 
From: 
Subject: CRYONICS Meta: Competive Discussions


Dear fellow cryonicists:

Reading over some of the Net postings of the past week or so, I 
have been not a little disappointed.  While there is still some useful 
dialogue going on, much of what has been said has been 
competitive mudslinging, pure and simple.

Obviously, I don't advocate censorship, and I think there is great 
value in letting individuals choose to discuss the topics which most 
interest them.  Spontaneous orders most often produce the most 
desirable results, especially in the realm of ideas and knowledge.  
Still, though, I must wonder aloud about the utility of postings 
motivated solely by the omnipresent competition among cryonics 
organizations.  

Possibly, there are many prospective members lurking on this list 
just waiting for a sign as to which organization to sign up with.  (I 
doubt this, but let us assume it to be true for the sake of argument.)  
I do not believe that such prospects will be swayed much--if at all--
by the kind of dialogue we have seen recently.  Worse, I fear that 
they are swayed in the direction of *less enthusiasm about cryonics 
in general.*

The fact is that there are benefits and drawbacks to signing up with 
any of the current cryonics organizations.  Were we having a purely 
academic conversation, I feel certain that even the most staunch 
proponents of each organization could play devil's advocate and list 
many benefits to joining organizations other than their own.

But obviously, these conversations are not purely academic.  Each 
of us who represents an organization in an official capacity have our 
jobs and the success of the company we work for to think about.  
And each of us who has signed up with one or another of the 
organizations desire to see that organization become strong enough 
to withstand the pressures of society and government that already 
exist, as well as the (possibly greater) pressures that are yet to 
come.  Beyond this, most of us think that there are lives at stake 
here--those of the patients already in suspension, those of our many 
friends who are fellow members, and most importantly, our own.

Because of this, there should be no surprise when arguments and 
heated debate occur.  We feel the need to defend that which we 
think is right, honest, rational, and good, so that those who have 
not yet decided might be swayed to join us in our pursuit of same.  
We believe winning this battle of ideas to be crucial in winning our 
larger war against death.

But honestly, I do not think that the way to persuade those who 
remain unconvinced is to attack those cryonicists whose views you 
do not share, at least not in this forum.  Indeed, I believe that 
bickering here more often makes everyone involved look bad, even 
if one party is clearly "right."  

And how often does that really happen?  We discuss issues that are 
logically complex, which often involve predictions and guesses of 
future events and trends.  It is rare that anyone can reasonably 
proclaim one view or philosophy to be right beyond a shadow of a 
doubt--especially when it comes to the structure and function of 
cryonics organizations.  Besides, to the outside observer, and even 
to ourselves, anyone already signed up with a cryonics organization 
must be discounted as *very biased* even when we "know" 
they/we are right.  (OF COURSE we're going to emphasize the 
positives and de-emphasize the negatives of that which we are 
selling.  We wouldn't be good salesmen if we did it any other way.)

There is now copious information to be had about the various 
cryonics organizations.  In my opinion, we should let those who 
want to delve into that information do so, but we should devote as 
little bandwidth as possible in this forum to discussions that amount 
to nothing more than political debates and campaigning.

We have a lot to learn from each other.  The cryonics community is 
increasingly diverse and rich with alternative viewpoints.  The more 
we listen to those viewpoints which vary from our own, the more 
we solicit information and discussion from those who have differing 
perspectives, the more we will *all* learn.

So by all means, let us talk about organizational structure, and 
methodology, and protocol.  But please, let us remember that if any 
of us is to defeat death--our real enemy, our *common* enemy--
then we must grow the cryonics community as a whole as fast as 
possible.  We must get scientists and doctors and engineers and 
hackers and janitors and fishermen involved in what we are doing, 
get them interested in the science of cryonics, in the power of the 
idea, in the technological and ideological revolution which is 
happening all around them.  To do that, we must move out of the 
quagmire of personality conflicts and into the freedom found in the 
cluster of ideas associated with our common love for life.

Arguments about which life boat holds the most air are not likely to 
interest those who have not yet fully discerned that the ship is going 
down.  If you believe the Cryonet to be an effective marketing tool, 
and intend to use it as such, please consider the larger effects of 
your words and actions every time you attack your competitors.  
How you fight is just as important, if not more important, than what 
you are fighting about, *especially* to those who have much less 
information than you on which to form their own opinions.

I direct this at everyone.  Not just those on the fictitious "other 
side."

Long Life!

Derek Ryan
Membership Administrator
Alcor Life Extension Foundation
Ph. # 602-922-9013
Email: 

P.S.  Since I know my appeal will not end all such discussion, might 
we at least follow Steve Harris' example and move the obviously 
political threads over to CRYONICS.POLITICS?

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3149