X-Message-Number: 7199 From: ( RON SELKOVITCH) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 15:29:09, -0500 Subject: Times article With reference to the Times article which included a sidebar about cryonics, Olaf Henny said: <There is an incredible opportunity to reach a *huge* well educated audience with concise and factual letters to the editor..> I absolutely agree. This is a unique opportunity to make ourselves known to a wide audience. <The important thing is, that we, who are not as well versed in these subjects stay out of it, and do not use up the print space, that should go to the more competent.> There I do not agree. I believe that the overriding consideration in the editors decision to publish letters on a subject is whether the article generated sufficient interest - and that, I would assume is based more upon the number of responses and less upon the quality of the letters. As a matter of interest (I hope), I sent a letter to the Times about two weeks ago on a similar subject. It was in response to an article about the 25th anniversary of Pioneer 10. The article stated that Pioneer was on its way into space with a plaque destined to be possibly received by extraterrestrials in 100,000 years time. I was not published My letter read: <To the Editor The article 'Still Ticking',about Pioneer 10, ends by pessimistically stating that if it reaches Proxima Centauri in 100,000 years none of us will be around. Not necessarily so. I and a number of others who have arranged to be frozen and stored at our death are optimistic that not only we will be revived and restored by a more advanced technology but we will live vastly extended lives. In fact we may not only be around when Pioneer reaches its destination - we may be there to greet it. Ron Selkovitch - cryonicist.> In my disappointment at not being published, I came up with three possible reasons; 1. Not worthy of being published 2 Too 'way out' 3 Not sufficient interest in the subject Item one -I will leave to the reader Item two -Perhaps to the editor, my letter looked as if it came from the 'lunatic fringe' Item three -That's (IMHO) the most likely reason, confirmed, I think, by the fact that not a single letter was published on the article. My suggestion therefore is - Lets all write to the Times irrespective of our level of expertise. It should be interesting, and informative to see how many letters get published, and which ones. Another suggestion. if you feel you don't have enough expertise, then practice a little harmless deception. Pretend you are absolutely new to the subject and your interest was generated by the article. If we get one letter published we will be ahead. If we get more than one, its cause for celebration. Remember, even if you don't get your letter published, you can still take credit if others are published. Do it now! Email to: Ron S Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7199