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