CryoNet #32404 - #32408

CryoNet - Mon 22 Feb 2010

    #32404: RE: uppity_cryonet_members [David Stodolsky]
    #32405: Re: Bad publicity leads to more hostile relatives? [David Stodolsky]
    #32406: LJ's alleged next moves [MARK PLUS]
    #32407: PR debacles and how to avoid future ones [Rudi Hoffman]
    #32408: Re: CryoNet #32403 [Dave Sill]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32404%2D32408

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe
To post a message to CryoNet, send your message to:
    [email protected]
from the same address to which you are aubscribed.

Since all CryoNet messages are archived and accessible via WWW,
including search engines, make certain that your postings
reflect how you want the world to see you.

To retrieve past messages, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the message numbers in the subject line.
(Message 0003 describes the advanced syntax.)
You also can retrieve them via the CryoNet web page at URL:
    http://www.cryonet.org/

For administrative or other questions/suggestions, send email
to me at "[email protected]" with "cryonics" in the subject line.
    - Kevin Q. Brown


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32404
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: uppity_cryonet_members
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:53:23 +0100
References: <[email protected]>

On 19 Feb 2010, at 11:00 AM, Warren Keevers wrote:

> Actually there was one comment that really stuck with me, and I  
> forget who
> it was from (sorry), but stated the fact that the discussions here  
> don't
> really reflect the majority of cryonics members, it is just the vocal
> minority.


The problem of a vocal minority dominating discussion and the  
unacceptable 'noise' level on CryoNet has been a problem for a long  
time. The current rating system was installed as a stopgap measure.  
That has proved to have a marginal effect and to create problems of  
censorship, probably due to low participation in the rating process.

At the time, I suggested a theoretically sound approach to quality  
control that you can read about here, if you have five minutes:

http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$14

Stodolsky, D. S. (2002). Computer-network based democracy: Scientific  
communication as a basis for governance. Proceedings of the 3rd  
International Workshop on Knowledge Management in e-Government, 7,  
127-137.


Comprehensive exposition:

http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$19

Stodolsky, D. S. (1995). Consensus Journals: Invitational journals  
based upon peer review. The Information Society, 11(4).


Setting this up in a trial form, would be a relatively straightforward  
programming job. You have urged us to *do something*. As a programmer,  
this is your chance to contribute to the progress of life-extension  
technology. A high quality publication would improve communication  
within the Movement, and improve the reputation of the Movement with  
the scientific community and the general public. As the latest news  
shows, such improvement is needed in order to reduce the risk of poor  
suspensions as a result of interference with procedures.


dss

David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32404

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32405
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Bad publicity leads to more hostile relatives?
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:56:14 +0100
References: <[email protected]>

On 21 Feb 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:

>  And even if Alcor wins custody
> of Robbins's body, the media might frame the story in a way  
> sympathetic to
> the relatives and derogatory to Alcor, contributing to problems down  
> the
> line with other suspensions opposed by the suspendees' family members.
>
> What should we do to keep this from happening to potentially all of  
> us with
> living relatives?

Until  cryonics goes mainstream, there is little hope of escaping  
negative press coverage. In the media, the motto is, "If it bleeds, it  
leads." Negative, sensational, and bizarre stories - true of not- sell  
best. So, that is the coverage we can expect from the commercial media.

If marketing is restructured to enroll whole families, then  
interference will be reduced. Recruiting enough families in a legal  
jurisdiction to influence local policy will reduce the risk of non- 
cooperation from hospitals and local officials. This is well within  
the capabilities of the Movement, if jurisdictions are carefully  
chosen. See my earlier analysis concerning the repackaging of cryonics.


dss


David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32405

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32406
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:54:30 -0700
Subject: LJ's alleged next moves
From: MARK PLUS <[email protected]>

Apparently few cryonicists have noticed this post on the Cult
Education Forum by someone with the user name Anon1. I don't vouch for
its validity:

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,64749,82234#msg-82234

February 20, 2010 08:39PM

A quick update on the Alcor/Johnson saga.

Word on the street says Johnson is on the war path. I would say his
prediction in his book is 100% accurate. He made a statement in his
book that in lieu of doing the right thing by correcting their
behavior, Alcor would instead file many frivolous lawsuits against him
during the months following the release of his book. This must be
true. According to a cryonics chat board Alcor has file lawsuits in
both New York and in Arizona. In doing so Alcor's attorney knowingly
submitted documents to both courts without editing out Johnson
personal information such as his social security number and date of
birth. I verified this information on the cryonics chat board called
"Cold Filter.” Someone who calls himself "FD” posted a link to
Johnson's information. I am sure this was to terrorize Johnson. See
link:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1265436169/Apparently%2C+it+was+the+one+referenced+below

A little birdie recently told me that Johnson is now "pulling out all
stops.” Because Alcor refuses to back off of Johnson and continues to
hound him, rumor has it that Johnson has documented evidence of 20+
cases where Alcor and another cryonics company called Suspended
Animation have performed their unregulated procedures with
untrained/nonmedical/nonlicensed personal within the walls of many
hospitals. As I understand it, this spring Johnson plans to present
his concerns to various hospitals and healthcare executive committees
and associations. Because of Johnson position and background within
the medical communities, I am sure Johnson will not have a problem
bending the ear of a few hospital executives. Can you imagine the look
on hospital CEO's faces when Johnson goes into detail of what has been
going on within their facilities? This will surely result in a ban
against the practice of cryonics within hospitals and other healthcare
facilities. If I were Alcor I'd be trying to kiss and make up with
Johnson instead of antagonizing him at this point.

The same little birdie has informed me that Johnson will be releasing
the rest of his "secret recordings” to the media during the upcoming
months and that several individuals after reading his book have come
forward to collaborate some of Johnson's accusations. One individual
who use to work next door to Alcor claims he and his coworkers have
witnessed Alcor dumping human blood behind their facility. According
to the individual, after the dumping, Alcor employees would use a
pressure washer to wash the blood down a storm drain. This individual
claims to actually have pictures of Alcor employees committing this
act.

And.here is the BIG BOMB.Another individual who once worked for a guy
name Saul Kent (owner of Alcor and Suspended Animation) and someone
named Bill Faloon and someone named Ruddell in Florida has contacted
Johnson about some sort of criminal activity that they (Kent, Faloon
and Ruddell) were involved in and who has evidence of such. I've been
told that this particular individual has presented his evidence to
Johnson who will soon be going straight to the national media. I have
a feeling the ground in Florida and in Arizona is about to quake.

Out yesterday is yet another story where Alcor is trying to sue
another family this time in Colorado Springs, CO over a dead body.
Yes, it's all about money AGAIN. Remember last year Alcor tried to sue
an Iowa family by the name of Richardson over their brother's remains
that were already buried for several months? I am happy to say the
judge laughed Alcor out of court on that one, but apparently they have
not learned their lesson. Here is a recent article on Alcor's latest,
heartless and tasteless stunt:

http://www.kktv.com/home/headlines/84811927.html

The authorities need to get a handle on these clowns.

I will report back here as I hear more.

Anon1

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32406

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32407
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 10:22:53 -0500
Subject: PR debacles and how to avoid future ones
From: Rudi Hoffman <[email protected]>

--00c09f8a4f6aee3d1404801de359

Hello, Cryonetters, Alcor Board, Cryonics Staff, and whom it may concern:

This is Rudi from Florida.  I just returned from a marvelous vacation to
Mardi Gras in New Orleans.  Because of the 247 emails to respond to in my
inbasket, I deleted some cryonets  and other posts unread.  So I am just now
learning some disturbing details about the second Alcor legal battle within
the year between Alcor and relatives.

I am truly dismayed about the possible negative publicity that will arise
from both these two cases.  And how this could not just impact public
policy, but *insurance company willingness to associate with cryonics*.

When we have individuals who have been dead for weeks, in the Florida case,
or many days going on weeks, in the Colorado case, and Alcor is forced (?)
to go to court to gain custody of the body/client/patient it makes our whole
enterprise look just awful.  And not just look awful...it IS awful.
Unacceptable.

I understand why the Alcor board and management feel they must prove that
they will engage legally to "protect the client's wishes."

And in all cases, including Ted W...that the money potentially going to
Alcor is an issue...perhaps THE issue.

Here is the point of this posting:

First, a copy of an email posted yesterday/today on cryonet posing a very
important question:

Mary Robbins's relatives might have decided to interfere with her suspension
because they had heard the previous episodes of bad publicity regarding
Alcor, including rumors of the abuse of a frozen head. If they succeed in
preventing Robbins's suspension, while also intercepting the money she had
set aside for it, that will give other members' relatives the precedent and
incentive to try to stop their suspensions. And even if Alcor wins custody
of Robbins's body, the media might frame the story in a way sympathetic to
the relatives and derogatory to Alcor, contributing to problems down the
line with other suspensions opposed by the suspendees' family members.
What should we do to keep this from happening to potentially all of us with
living relatives?

--
Mark Plus
Life is short: Freeze hard!

(end copying of Mark's post.)

The reason these legal battles...and terrible delays experienced in the past
by both Alcor and CI...occurred at all is POOR PLANNING and DOCUMENTATION.

And this is so tragically unnecessary!

Life insurance AND annuity contracts with named beneficiaries go DIRECTLY to
the beneficiary, bypassing probate, grumpy relatives, and delays.

Especially in the case of life insurance, the money is created exactly when
needed, *and does NOT reduce the estate* *otherwise going to the family.  *

This is why life insurance funding makes sense from a structural as well as
economic standpoint.

Additionally, properly named beneficiaries on an annuity contract can
work...although there may be a perception, as evidently is the case in the
current Mary Robbins case, on the part of potential beneficiaries that there
is a genuine and available asset that either comes to them or to
Alcor/CI/ACS.

A SUGGESTION, IN WRITING, TO CRYONICS BOARD MEMBERS AND MANAGEMENT

Alcor, CI, and ACS should initiate immediately a FULL documentation and
funding analysis. For every client on their books, starting with the old and
unwell.  In fact, it is my understanding that something like this has been
happening, at least at Alcor.  Although I suspect this activity has been
deprioritized with current legal "crisis de-jours" and suspensions.

It needs to be REPRIORTIZED to avoid a third lawsuit and Public Relations
debacle this year.

Of COURSE this is time consuming, painstaking, costly, and highly
inconvenient.  I can relate to this, as I have a goal of simply contacting
several hundred of my clients to update their emails and contact data...a
project I hoped to have completed in February which may take until April
best case.

But, compared to the downside that we as a community face as a result of
court battles, I suggest that something like this is necessary.  Included in
this analysis could be an assessment by the member about whether his family
or relatives may object.  AND THESE CONVERSATIONS SHOULD BE RECORDED, to
memorialize the client's wishes and protect everyone's interests.  Ideally,
a video of each person signed for suspension should be copied to all
potential stakeholders.  At minimum, a taped interview would be clear
evidence of the client's wishes.

REGARDING MARY ROBBINS--AND A PERSONAL COMMITMENT


I am not privy at this moment to the documentation or legal details of the
Mary Robbins case.

Did the annuity at issue have ALCOR as irrevocable beneficiary directly?
Was a copy of full beneficiary information copied to all relevant parties?
Do the family members have actual documentation that Ms. Robbins changed her
mind in writing?  If this were my client things would have been handled
impeccably, and we would not be in "Alcor Legal Battle Part TWO (three
counting LJ) within a 12 month period.

Not knowing the full pattern, it is easy to second guess these situations.
I am endeavoring to *not* do this with Alcor board and management.  Alcor
management and board are very intelligent people, doing the very best they
can with a barrage of awkward situations.

I am copying this posting to the Alcor board, and hereby *volunteering* to
help make such calls to reduce the likelihood of future court cases like
these.  Other cryonics members may also wish to volunteer to call their
fellows and record the conversations with permission.  I have already
obtained the phone recording equipment to accomplish this.  It costs about
50 bucks at Radio Shack.  Privacy and confidentiality issues exist, but the
necessity of making SURE of arrangements SUPERSEDE these.


IN SUMMARY

In conjunction with other recent legal and PR events, this Colorado
situation looks like a public relations disaster in the making.

It is my sincere hope that this situation can be resolved without further
legal wrangling.  Alcor may find that a dignified retreat could be better
than a public perception that Alcor goes to court to "freeze people who are
dead for weeks."

Insurance companies are VERY reputation sensitive.  The Cryonics  community
has already LOST many fine insurance companies who formerly were willing to
have cryonics organizations as OWNERS as well as beneficiaries due to what
was described to me as "REPUTATION RISK."  We are down to a single carrier
in some states allowing transparent ownership of policies by cryonics
organizations.   Folks, this is a potential crisis which can be averted.

It is my professional opinion that *losing insurance carriers due to
reputation risk* is a much more immediate threat to cryonics than even the
long term public policy changes resulting from legal controversy.  I
therefore request and beseech the Alcor board to end this Mary Robbins
lawsuit as quickly and gracefully as possible.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Sincerely Yours,

Rudi

-- 
Rudi Richard Hoffman CFP CLU ChFC

World's Leading Cryonics Insuror rudihoffman.com
Former Board Member Financial Planning Association fpafla.com
Board Member Salvation Army salvationarmy.org
Member Alcor Life Extension Foundation alcor.org,
Member Cryonics Institute cryonics.org
Certified Financial Planner(TM) CFP Board of Standards
Member World Transhumanist Association http://transhumanism.org/

--00c09f8a4f6aee3d1404801de359

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32407

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32408
Date: 21 Feb 2010 10:43:50 -0500
From: "Dave Sill" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32403
References: <[email protected]>

> Message #32403
> Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 08:32:33 -0700
> Subject: Bad publicity leads to more hostile relatives?
> From: MARK PLUS <[email protected]>
> 
> What should we do to keep this from happening to potentially all of us with
> living relatives?

I'm no expert, but I think the most important step is to make sure
that all of your close relatives know that you want to be cryonically
preserved, that you're aware of the negative public opinions and
publicity, and that you're aware of the low probability of eventual
reanimation. Tell them that you'd like their support, but, regardless
of how they feel, this is your decision, and any interference in the
process would be inappropriate and unwelcome.

-Dave

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32408

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************