X-Message-Number: 8727
From: "S.J. Van Sickle" <>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 09:22:17 +0000
Subject: Re: Clouding Our Minds

Mr. Jackson:

> That is a *completely* false statement, Fred. My letter expressed my
> negative response to the deceptive way in which you and Michael Cloud are
> using the promised roundtables as a vehicle to TELEMARKET the life
> memberships. Do you understand the distinction?

 <snip>

> Again, Fred, you are completely missing, or avoiding, the point, and I wish
> I knew which. I thought the idea of a roundtable was very fine. That is why
> I was so angry and disappointed when I found that the call was bait for a
> sales pitch.

I'm not disputing your take on this, but I find this kind of
suprising.  I must have thrown it away or I would quote it, but I
received a letter explaining the lifetime member program and
informing me that I would get a call to arrange a time for a
round-table.  I have not gotten that call or participated in a round
table yet, but I honestly don't remember thinking that it would be
anything *but* a sales pitch for the lifetime memberships.  I
suspect the "scheduling" call was wildly different from the letter, 
or perhaps you missed the letter somehow, or perhaps my memory or
interpretation wrong.  I will look for it again in my files...  

> You have not addressed this point at all, Fred. Will you do me the courtesy
> of rereading my original posting and *answering* the questions there?

 <and snipped from later in the p ost>

> In other words, you contend that my criticism of your marketing
> methods was inappropriate for this list. Why do you say that, Fred?
> What is more appropriate for this list than matters of a cryonics
> provider's image and survival?

I agree that Fred's response was entirely inadequate and 
inappropriate.  In his defence, however, is the still painful memory 
of airing Alcor internal disputes on the open forum of the Cryonet.  
I believe that openness is *vital*, but there are varying levels of 
appropriateness.  Perhaps this would be a good occasion to strongly 
suggest a mailing list limited to Alcor suspension members.  CryoCare 
has such a forum, and I have yet to see disagreements spill over into 
more public venues.  There would still be a Cryonet for issues of 
interest to all, and to as a last resort take public issues that 
cannot or will not be resolved internally.  I'm not suggesting, Mr. 
Jackson, that there is anything wrong with making your complaint 
on Cryonet, merely that Fred may have felt less threatened and 
therefore responded more fully in a less public arena.

Any volunteers?

> >We are open to hearing from other Alcor Members who
> >have participated in the phone calls, so we can better assess how the
> >majority feels.

> Well, you have heard from two more that I know of, just on this list. Both
> independently used the word "slick" in their criticisms. And again, if you
> don't get a full majority rising up and actively objecting, will you
> continue? Yes or no?

I find Michael Cloud's style irritating to say the least.  I would
be able to overcome the irritation in the face of *results*,
particularly since this experiment is directed towards members and
not the general public.  Alcor has historically been chronically
starved of capital, and to the extent that he is able to raise funds
for *capital improvements* (as opposed to operation funds) I will
consider him a success despite my dislike.  And honestly, you can
hardly expect Fred to receive unanimous approval for anything.

BTW, Fred, you *are* planning on using the funds mostly for capital 
rather than operating expenses, aren't you?

> Kennita also says:
> 
> >Is the image hit worth the increased membership or not?

This is a seperate question, since the goal of this particular
campaign is not raising membership.  I do think the image hit is not
worth it if we try this approach with the general public.

steve van sickle

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8727