X-Message-Number: 9016
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 23:59:14 -0800
From: Paul Wakfer <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #9005 Prometheus
References: <>

Bob Ettinger wrote:

>The only thing about Prometheus that was ever clear to me was the goal,


That's because you never had any real interest in giving it your support, or 
took

the time to understand and see the benefits of its other aspects. The *goal* had
been there for decades. It was the *method* of the Prometheus Project (my
invention) which attracted people and made it begin to work. Yet (or perhaps
because of) you still wouldn't give it any credence or support.


> that only in the most general terms. One thing that was always unclear was the
> question of succession in case Paul could not continue


I don't remember you ever bring up this point before and it was unimportant 
until

things actually got started. Until money was collected and research actually 
begun
there was no reason to have any succession arranged because there was no value
which could be transferred.

> (even though at early

> stages of discussion a for-profit corporation was envisioned, which would have
> created at least the formal framework for succession).


What you do not seem to understand, is that the succession arrangements of a 
trust

are far, far more solid than that of a for-profit corporation which is at the 
whim

of the stockholders. Also, the problem of holding single-mindedly to a purpose 
is
far better handled by a trust than a for-profit corporation. But you never took

the time to understand that. Instead you just complained and whined with 
suspicion
like so many others.

> But as I said in my most recent comment here, everyone agrees with Thomas

> Donaldson and with Paul Wakfer that the success of the research takes priority
> over other considerations

I don't believe that you agree with that. Your actions and posts here certainly
have not shown it.

> --unless those other considerations themselves tend
> to compromise that success.


And how can you possibly make any such judgment a priori? Oh, I guess it's 
because

of all the other well-funded research successes in cryonics that you can compare
it with :-)


In fact, Prometheus has been an order of magnitude more successful in attracting

research funding from the general cryonics community that anything else, ever. 
Why

couldn't you and other's simply acknowledge that and be happy about it and give 
me

your support and help, or at the least, leave me alone to carry on to complete 
and
enhance the success that I had already achieved?

> So now we get once more to the (to me) equally unclear status and
> relationships of 21st Century Medicine, BioPreservation, and the university
> that is said to be helping to fund (certain aspects of) Greg Fahy's research.


Bob, I explained this in great detail in my CryoNet post a few days ago. If it 
is
still not clear to you, then I maintain it is because you do not want it to be

clear to you. I don't think you are that stupid. You appear to have some 
interest
in constantly bringing this up as some kind of weapon for whatever political
purposes you are spinning (which I don't care or pretend to understand). If you

truly did not understand and wishes to know, then you would ask straight forward
questions about specific details instead casting aspersions and innuendo.

> My impression has been that Saul Kent and Bill Faloon, with or/and through

> 21st Century Medicine or/and BioPreservation, have always intended or hoped to
> get Greg's team to work full time on cryonics (brain primarily)--funding it
> themselves if possible and necessary, but of course seeking/accepting help
> from more or less any source, notably Prometheus.


Instead of giving us your "impression" why don't you stick to the *facts* of 
what

I and others have written, or ask more questions to ascertain them. In fact, 
21CM
does *not* wish to "seek/accept help from more or less any source". It is my
understanding that shares in 21CM are currently not for sale.

> Thomas Donaldson now suggests that 21 CM might be the appropriate entity to
> take over Prometheus.

Thomas spoke "out of turn". 21CM is doing independent work leading toward

suspended animation. When I thought to unite the two over a year ago at the time

that the current larger funding of 21CM first began, the idea was rejected. 
There
is great merit in having a separate and independent project running and many

reason why is would be more attractive to cryonics and life-extension 
supporters.
In fact, Greg Fahy had also rejected working with 21CM and was and is much more
attracted to the less cryonically oriented approach that I have framed for the
Prometheus Project. It was the Pilot Project and the attraction of the
full-fledged Prometheus Project that was an essential attractant with through a
very involved set of events caused him to now be in Southern California and
available to suspended animation/life-extension research full-time.

Furthermore, while I will reply to some of your points below, this whole

discussion is rather pointless, because 21CM has made it very clear that they do

not want the multitude of small contributors which comprise the Prometheus group
of pledgers. And, frankly, I quite understand why!

> That makes considerable sense, and might also fit in
> with the original Prometheus objective, on which most of its pledges were
> based, to become a for-profit group.

While most of the pledgers pledged under the assumption of a for-profit
corporation as the research executing organization, I don't think that it is at
all clear that they pledged in any large way *because* of that. In fact, if I
didn't believe that assumption was false then I would not have changed to a

charitable and business trust structure.I would suspect that I know my pledgers 
a
little better than you do, Bob.

> But it might not be so comfortable for
> those who just want to make donations for research and want assurance of
> maximum timely availability of results for cryonics organizations.

This is true and is a major reason for the charitable trust arrangement with
promises of immediate availability for cryonics use of any relevant Prometheus
research results.

> And there

> is also a possible question of succession involved, since again we have a very
> small number of key people (currently Kent, Faloon, and Fahy, as far as I
> know).


Bob, with any organization, there are always a few key people (especially in 
tiny
cryonics). There is always a question of succession, but this problem is better
solved with a trust and certainly better solved with a "movement" like the
Prometheus Project which now has over 90 people as pledgers.BTW, Greg Fahy is a

not a principal or even any employee of 21CM. He is a *consultant* and not 
nearly

as "key" as some others there. This has been made clear several times, in 
several
places. Why are you still confused?

> Paul has reported over $400,000 per year for Prometheus having been "pledged"
> under various conditions.


This is misleading. This conditions on all pledges are identical. (There was one

that was different. Ralph Merkle had added to his pledge the condition that 
"Greg
Fahy be somehow involved". However, that has now been satisfied. Where is your
$1000, Ralph? :-)

> Possibly much of this could be salvaged or realized,
> assuming that the motivations were mainly not financial. That is an important
> sum, and should not be abandoned before diligent efforts to find a way.


Aha! Caught you! In past posts, you have insufferably argued that the Prometheus

pledge total means very little since it is all completely hypothetical and 
"soft"

and when it comes time to collect, it will all - not be there. Well, which is 
it,
Bob?


> It seems to me what is most needed now is a CLEAR and straightforward proposal
> (or at least discussion) by Kent, Faloon, and Fahy. In the past, as it seems
> to me at least, much of the information from or about them has been very
> obscure, hedged, guarded, and difficult to evaluate.

To include Greg's name before these remarks is quite strange and shows a
completely lack of understanding of the past and the present. As for Saul and

Bill, I will leave response to them. I take it that you critical words: 
"obscure,
hedged, guarded" do not apply to me, since my writing have not been so.

Furthermore, it should be clear to everyone that "difficult to evaluate", is 
more
often due to a defect in the evaluator than the information provider.

> Mae and I personally, because of age, are unlikely to see full success of the
> research.


I sincerely hope not. At least, you have a good chance at being vitrified 
without
ice damage.

> And others are pursuing research (and we are supporting research)
> perhaps more closely related to the interests of older organization members.

And I wish CI would relate more to the 21CM research which would make their
cryopreservation's ever so much less damaging.

> But we still want it to succeed, as soon as possible, for many reasons. It is
> also possible that early partial successes by the Fahy team could improve our
> chances.

Certainly, I expect it to. BTW, there is, at the moment, no "Fahy team".
Hopefully, this will come later if/when it gets funded.

> In sum, we are more than willing to consider support for some
> variation or resumption of Prometheus. But there MUST be candid and clear
> discussions and proposals, no disingenuousness or evasiveness.


Well thanks a lot, Bob. Now that you think you might be able to "control" 
things,

you are being ever so much more positive. And BTW, I reject your implication 
that

any of my discussions and proposals have been less than candid and clear, and 
even

moreso that I have been disingenuous or evasive. You must be thinking of someone
else.

> Finally, we feel deep regret for Paul Wakfer's personal problems and
> disappointments.

Disappointments and let-downs I have had. Personal problems as normally defined

(family or health related), I do not have. What dismays me a little is that so 
few
people are capable of understanding someone (me) who puts his whole *life and

being* into what he cares for and works to achieve. That's why I have been able 
to

make some seemingly impossible things happen. It is also why I am a little 
erratic

and unstable at times. You don't find Herculean zealots who are also calm, cool,

reasonable, placid, never upset, every-day people. I don't mind telling you, 
that

when I was in the computer business, I occasionally even yelled at my customers!
But do you think any of them threw me out because of it? NO. Because they knew

that I would always have their system up and working and allowing them to 
achieve

their business goals, no matter what sacrifice it took on my part. And *that* is
why they were happy to pay me well.

> He has invested enormous effort, time, and (relatively) money

Not to mention blood, sweat, tears, loss of time with loved ones, and emotional
trauma.

> on Prometheus and other projects related to cryonics. These efforts may yet
> eventually prove successful in their primary aims.

I would like to hope so -- and thanks for the obituary :-)

-- Paul --

 Voice/Fax: 909-481-9620 Page: 800-805-2870
The Prometheus Project -- http://prometheus.morelife.org
Perfected Suspended Animation for Patient Stabilization
until Cures for Their Terminal Diseases are Available

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9016