CryoNet #33439 - #33442

CryoNet - Wed 9 Mar 2011

    #33439: Re: CryoNet #33425 [robomoon]
    #33440: People I would like to see make it into the future [Keith Henson]
    #33441: Allbout Evil Part 1 [M2darwin]
    #33442: All About Evil, Part 2 [M2darwin]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33439%2D33442

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.
Send questions, comments, or feedback to [email protected]
with "CryoNet" or "cryonics" somewhere in the Subject line.


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

Message #33439
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:07:20 +0100 (CET)
From: [email protected]
References: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #33425

Thought experiment is OK, although I never thought I could think at all. So when I uploaded only half of all the memories in my brain, my personal information will then be many times more secure than today. I must be even lucky if mind uploading is leaving out content from some retarded brain cells, espc. those storing all the crap I have seen in TV.

Just tomorrow, an architect and a manager of the house where my home is will be discussing the big chunks of plaster that fell down from the exterior. No single chunk fell on my head, so I'm still among the living. But I would like more than the current level of security.

A gun? Neither owned nor needed. After the better half of my memories has been uploaded, I can happily step outside, climb over the balcony, and jump. It's the 8th floor where I'm residing. Less than 4 meters to walk, more than 14 meters to fall (like a big chunk of plaster). Those silly old brain cells - compared to a real emotional computer grid that can be even repaired after a big chunk of plaster got dropped on its android head - really suck.

However, making sure my remains are thoroughly cremated has always been done by the law of federal German government.

Ron Havelock discussed in part: I would ask the uploaders to make this thought experiment. Upload the contents of your brain to the fullest extent allowed by future technology. Then blow your brains out with a gun and make sure your remains are thoroughly cremated. Are you happy to do this?

///

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33439

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

Message #33440
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:08:47 -0700
Subject: People I would like to see make it into the future
From: Keith Henson <[email protected]>

Over on the Extropian list I mentioned Freeman Dyson and Ted Nelson as
people I would like to have around in the future.

I certainly have hundreds if not thousands.

I don't know that building a data base and letting people endorse
people as future friends or something would accomplish anything, but
it seems like it would not take too much effort.

And maybe it might encourage those who are listed but not signed up to
consider it.

A wiki might be the method of choice.

Here is someone, though for all I know he might be signed up already,
given his interest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/magazine/06murdock-t.html

Keith

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33440

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

Message #33441
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 01:57:02 EST
Subject: Allbout Evil Part 1

Content-Language: en

 
Recently, this exchange took place on Chronosphere: 
Re Melody Maxim: "If you think that the current cryo organizations are so  
screwed up, she is free to get up off her ass and start a new organization..."
  
Response: That is really, really stupid comment. If you think that the  
current government is screwed up, you are free to start a new government. The  
same for the Army, or Red Cross. Yup, Right! 
I didn't think it was a stupid comment, and I believe my response should  
receive as wide a circulation within the cryonics community as possible, so 
here  it is: 
Actually, it is a very on-point comment, in this case, and here's why. Most 
 people who have any interest in the world around them will find lots to be 
 dissatisfied with - governments, NGOs, churches, the local Little League; 
all  can and do disappoint - sometimes genuinely, and sometimes on a 
colossal scale  (consider the distribution of HIV infected blood by the Red Cross 
in the 1980s,  or the Catholic Church's child molestation scandal). It is 
perfectly OK (and a  good thing in the bargain) for people to complain in such 
situations, and to  "rundown" the performance of the misbehaving 
institutions, without being  obligated to start new ones. We all have lives, and we 
would go mad and get  nothing done, if we acted to correct each moral or 
practical institutional error  that came to our attention. 
The material differences in Maxim's case which change her situation, and  
justify the comment about her are as follows: 
1) Cryonics is very small, and therefore individual actions can have  
staggering leverage in changing the course of affairs, and can easily completely  
transform a field or an organization. Anyone with experience in small,  
charitable, or special interest groups, knows first hand how a single 
individual  can build a group up into greatness, or destroy it utterly. It happens 
every  day. Thus, the amount of leverage and influence a single person can 
exert, and  the size of the group, are very material. 
2) This effect is vastly amplified when a whole discipline, or area of  
undertaking meets the criteria of #1, above. No one would argue that aviation 
is  not a critically important and highly influential component of our global 
 civilization today. And yet there was a time when it was a tiny, tiny 
thing -  smaller than cryonics, with very few people involved. At the start, it 
was  utterly dominated by the Wright Brothers, who had some very strange 
ideas about  the specifics of the technology that should be used to pursue it 
(wing warping  and control surface issues) and they controlled the 
fundamental patents -  all off them. They were strangling technological progress in 
aviation  via countless lawsuits. One man in particular, Glenn Curtis, pretty 
much broke  this stranglehold. Juan Trippe similarly transformed passenger 
aviation with Pan  Am. That's the nice thing about getting involved in 
transformative technologies  when they are nascent: the leverage you have as an 
individual to affect outcome  is so powerful, it is impossible to adequately 
express it in words - you have to  "see it to believe it," or to understand 
it. 
3) There is a tipping point between "idle bitching" (which is never idle - 
 what people say about enterprises and products to others, is just like 
voting)  and activism. That line is crossed when your criticism becomes 
substantial,  focused and sustained. There is both a quantitative and a qualitative 
 difference between saying, "I think McDonald's promoting their artery 
clogging  food to children is despicable," and launching a website dedicated to 
putting  them out of business, working to introduce legislation to ban 
Happy Meals, and  picketing their eateries." Likewise, while there are tens, or 
hundreds of  thousands of people who voice sympathy for the goals and 
position of the (very  numerically small) "Patriot Movement" in the USA, there 
are very few Timothy Mc  Veighs, who will blow up buildings. Thus, there is a 
tipping point between  voicing criticism/support and becoming an activist. 
Nation-states spend billions  of dollars trying to carefully determine when 
individuals of interest to them  reach/exceed this tipping point, with 
respect to their national and  international interests; and wisely so! 
4) Not all activists are created equal. Lot's of peoples' kids have been  
abducted and "disappeared" or murdered by pedophile monsters. It happens 
every  day. Some of these people are tongue tied and shy, others are 
permanently  incapacitated by their grief and loss, and almost all of these suffering 
souls  lack the unique mix of talent, drive, and native communication 
ability that John  Walsh has. There, in fact, is a perfect example of the 
leverage of a single  individual. When Adam Walsh was abducted and killed, he was 
just one of  countless other victims whose cases were mishandled by law 
enforcement, and to  which the public was largely indifferent. One man, Adam's 
father, John Walsh,  changed that: and to the extent that pedophilia, violent 
and otherwise, has  become a central issue in the US, and in most of Western 
Europe, John Walsh is  significantly responsible (e.g., Adam's Law, America'
s Most Wanted...). Anyone who  thinks John Walsh is "just an average guy" is 
mistaken; he is an extraordinary  man, with a unique blend of talents that 
made him, in conjunction with his  tragic circumstances, one of the few, if 
not one of the the only people who  could do what he did. 
5) Melody Maxim is an articulate and reasonably intelligent person with 
above  average communication skills, and technical expertise in an area of 
great use to  cryonics. One has only to look at Jerry Leaf, who was in many ways 
similar to  Maxim in technical acumen and in energy, interest in cryonics, 
and motivation to  change it. Unlike Maxim, Jerry was not a prolific writer. 
However, what he was,  was disgusted and appalled at what he saw when he 
arrived on the scene in  cryonics in the 1970s. He soon became frustrated, and 
then downright angry at  the intransigence he encountered on the part of 
many in cryonics to change.  Indeed, the one cryonicist who Maxim does not 
materially criticize, and who she  "get's on with," Bob Ettinger, was Jerry's 
most implacable "foe" in terms of  interfere with Jerry's efforts to 
improve the level of patient care. Ettinger is  a consummate politician, so this 
may not be obvious in his public statements,  but the fact remains that it 
is so. Ettinger, and his late wife Mae Junod, were  relentless in their 
resistance to even the most basic of changes, such as moving  away from perfusion 
using embalming techniques, done recipe-style, with zero  data collection 
and no public accountability (and for many years done with  almost 
homeopathic levels of cryoprotection). Jerry's response was very  different from Maxim'
s. He got involved, he became confrontational, very  confrontational, but 
in almost exclusively positive ways. He sought out anyone  and everyone in 
cryonics who either shared, or could help him execute his vision  of 
transforming cryonics from a ritualistic mortuary-style procedure, to a  science and 
medicine based disciple with documentation, case analysis, and  feedback - 
all of which allowed for progressive, positive evolution in the  technology.  
6) Ultimately, because he found then extant cryonics organizations so  
intractable, he DID have to found his own company to deliver cryonics services,  
Cryovita Labs. These efforts were tremendously successful. They transformed 
 cryonics. And while many of those gains were lost with lost with his  
cryopreservation, and my abdication of responsibility to continue that effort,  
there is still a significant core of people trying very hard to achieve that 
 level of excellence again, or at very least to "eliminate" the culture of 
errors  and iatrogenesis which now dominate cryonics. 
7) Maxim has now unarguably become an activist, and spends enormous amounts 
 of time and effort on cryonics. She is actively involved in and 
encouraging both  government regulation, and the banning of access by cryonics 
personnel to dying  patients in hospital. She is doing these things absent input or 
collaboration  from even a SINGLE committed cryonicist. She has attacked 
and belittled me, and  yet she has provided not a single technical criticism 
of the large body of  technical writing and work that I've done. Her two main 
points of attack are  both based on distortions or lies.She repeatedly 
claims that I said I've done  1,000 dog perfusions and she also claims I've "
lied about being a Board Eligible  Perfusionist." Here is what I actually 
said: 
"If all I had was perfusion experience in cryonics; I'd have had  
essentially no experience at all. At one time I was told I was a Board eligible  
perfusionist (1970s), but I never sat for the Boards and quite honestly, I did  
very little clinical perfusion. I started out in extracorporeal medicine 
doing  acute (ICU) hemodialysis and working in the dog lab doing CPB. My guess 
would be  that I've pumped ~1,000 animals in my career; this is a trivial 
case load  compared to that of a profession perfusionist over the same span 
of years. On  the other hand, they call it a learning curve because it does 
plateau and after  a certain amount of experience, animal or human, you do 
reach a level of  knowledge and experience I liken to having learned to ride a 
bicycle. Having  said, make no mistake about it, it has been 8 years since I
've done CPB and I  would require substantial re-education in terms of my 
procedural skills and  knowledge; reflexive behavior and immediately 
accessible knowledge and judgment.  And this brings up THE critical point I was 
trying to make: there are two kinds  of knowledge in a craft: didactic (book or 
factual knowledge) and procedural or  hands-knowledge. To some extent it is 
almost impossible for most people to  master didactic knowledge in a 
discipline like surgery, perfusion, or operating  an automobile without also having 
procedural knowledge; actually DOING the tasks  involved, like driving an 
automobile under real-world conditions if you want to  be able to drive a car.
" 
What I said (above) was that in 30+ plus years I've "pumped about 1,000  
animals." That's probably true; I didn't keep statistics. I started 
perfusing  animals when I was 14 years old - initially turtles, and then rats and 
guinea  pigs. Most of these were not "survival" experiments, but the topic 
under  discussion was the learning curve for perfusion technology. And a 
significant  part of that learning curve is understanding the basic physiology 
and the  mechanics and physics of the procedure. For instance, the 
relationship between  cannula size and flow and back pressure, the effect of tubing 
diameter on flow  under the influence of gravity (critical for obtaining 
adequate venous return)  and the purpose, structure and performance of various 
circuit elements, such as  type of pumps, filters/bubble traps, pressure 
monitoring equipment and so on.  
Many of these perfusions were cryoprotective perfusions, usually followed 
by  freezing, in order to better understand cryoinjury. Many more were 
related to  understanding ischemic injury, and ways to avoid it. Over 30 years I 
perfused  turtles, rats, guinea pigs, cats, rabbits and dogs. Materially, I 
was at pains  to point out that this did not make me in any way as qualified 
as a clinical  perfusionist. What I didn't say, and should have, was that in 
some ways  these experiences made me more qualified - in the setting of 
cryonics,  because, for instance, perfusing cryoprotectants, reperfusing brains 
and bodies  after prolonged ischemic intervals, and carrying out prolonged 
asanguineous  perfusion at ~ 5 deg C, all require unique knowledge, insights 
and skills that a  clinical perfusionist simply (and quite understandably) 
has no opportunity to  gain experience with. 
Her second big gripe is that I said I was told I was eligible to become a  
Board Certified perfusionist in the mid-1970s. As I pointed out when I made 
this  remark, this was not something I pursued. Perfusion was a relatively 
new field  in the 1970s, and I do not know what the requirements were for 
Board  Certification at that time. This is the back-story to that remark: 
The hospital where I worked as both an acute (ICU) and chronic (outpatient) 
 dialysis technician in the 1970s had had a dog lab, which they had 
shuttered.  When they decided to try to offer heart transplantation, they 
constructed a new  facility and began an aggressive program of animal work to master 
the skills  required. A number of the technical staff who had operated the 
previous dog lab  had migrated in to hemodialysis and perfusion, and one 
these men had done both.  He was a personal friend, and he became the manager of 
the new dog lab. I began  volunteering in the dog lab, primarily as a "
perfusionist," often working 3 and  sometimes 4 days a week. This was where I 
first learned that dogs do not  tolerate median sternotomies well (splitting 
the breast bone to gain access to  the heart and lungs). The surgeon running 
the program was a jerk. He was the  kind of guy who called highly competent 
scrub nurses "wastes of space" and "a  waste of atoms," and who hurled 
$10K DeBakey major cardiovascular instrument  trays across the OR, and upended 
back tables covered with costly instruments and  basins of ice/fluids, when 
procedures failed. 
This surgeon killed more dogs than I could count - they died of pulmonary  
edema, one after the other: something he often blamed on the perfusionists. 
It  wasn't until years later that I learned that none other than Christian 
Barnard,  faced exactly the same problem when he was tooling up to do the 
first human  heart transplant in 1967. Barnard was smart enough, and humble 
enough, to go to  Russia and study under the maverick Russian surgeon Vladimir 
Demikhov, in order  to master the SURGICAL technique required to get 
consistent survival of dogs in  this model.  
However, humility was not this surgeon's strong suit, so the carnage  
continued, until another surgeon, skilled in cardiothoracic surgery in dogs  
using the median sternomoy approach, arrived on the scene. I don't know how many 
 dogs we pumped, but it was a lot - because when one died acutely, this 
fool had  another brought in. We would often bounce between the two ORs several 
times in a  12 hour day!
I was also being taken to assist on human cases, and sometimes  to run the 
pump solo. This was a different era in medicine. While most of us in  
hemodialysis (excepting the RN's) had no undergraduate degrees, those who were  
deemed capable, were placed in ICU, where they administered blood and blood  
products, dynamically adjusted ionotropes during the dialysis of critically 
ill  and hemodynamically unstable patients, administered "dangerous" IV 
medications  of all manner, including vancomycin, iron-dextran (Imferon), 
cisplatin, and just  about any other drug that could be given while a patient was 
on dialysis (i.e.,  that bound to protein, or was otherwise not dialyzable). 
We did this because it  saved work for the nursing staff, since the patient 
already their vascular  system accessible, and large volumes of fluid could 
be given comparatively  rapidly. AND that fluid could then be removed 
(leaving the drug behind); no  small matter in patients who can't make urine and 
are restricted to ~1,000 mlL  of fluid intake per day). 
I was told I would make a good perfusionist, and since the person who 
wanted  to recruit me was a principal in the local AmSECT chapter, he told me 
that if I  studied the materials for the exam that he gave me, and continued 
with clinical  work, I would be eligible to sit for the boards under the "
grandfather" rules.  This was much the same position Jerry Leaf was in; the 
difference being that he  was vastly more experienced than I, and had pumped 
hundreds of human cases, and  countless dogs. I remember being told that the 
certification process was  transitioning, or had just transitioned at that 
time (was becoming more  rigorous), and I also recall being told that no 
undergraduate or graduate degree  would be required, given my prior "history." To 
what extent this was true, I  don't know. And it really didn't matter, 
because given my commitment to  cryonics, it would have been logistically 
impossible. You can bail on dialysis  to do a cryonics case, but at that time, it 
was not possible to do so in  clinical perfusion without causing scheduling 
mayhem, and possibly jeopardizing  lives. 
End of Part 1


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33441

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

Message #33442
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 01:58:19 EST
Subject: All About Evil, Part 2

Content-Language: en

Furthermore, in looking over the study materials, I doubted I could handle  
the math exercises - the same reason why I gave up any consideration of 
pursuing  an undergraduate degree in biology, with the objective of getting a 
doctorate,  and doing research. The points here are that I was in no way 
trying to pass  myself off as equivalent to a Board Certified perfusionist, and 
in fact, in  every human case that my company, BioPreservation did, I had a 
skilled (and  often Board Certified ) perfusionist pumping the case.  
This lengthily detour is germane in responding to your (George's) comment,  
because Maxim did not bother to ask clarifying questions, or even to in any 
way  qualify her remarks - rather she attacked and accused. In the first 
instance, by  incorrectly and unjustly calling me a liar. That indicates 
pre-judgment, and it  also cuts off further communication. This has been her 
pattern of interaction  with virtually everyone in cryonics. This would be 
understandable, if she had  had the level of interaction and bad experience she 
endured at SA - which was  indeed a mad and incompetent place (one which 
nearly drove me crazy in the 6  days I spent there in 2006) with everyone else 
in cryonics. But this is not the  case. All of my direct interactions with 
her are here: 
_http://cryoeuro.eu:8080/download/attachments/425990/Maxim+-+Darwin+Cold+Filter+Exchanges+February%2C+2009.pdf_ 
(http://cryoeuro.eu:8080/download/attachments/425990/Maxim+-+Darwin+Cold+Filter+Exchanges+February,+2009.
pdf)  
I don't see anything there that justifies her attacks, or her judgment that 
I  am technically incompetent, or otherwise worthless.  
8) There are also people like the deWolf's, in cryonics, who are working  
quite hard to improve things. Maxim worked with Aschwin deWolf during her 
time  at SA, and I note that, so far at least, she has had little or vitriol 
for him,  or his wife, Channa - and also notably zero positive cooperative 
interaction.  There are also the many other "unseen" medical professionals and 
technicians in  cryonics who are not active, largely because they have no 
way to be, given the  attitudes of the two dominant US cryonics 
organizations. Attempting to make  meaningful technical change at CI is a frustrating, 
micro- incremental, and  mostly unrewarding process. Most suggestions are met 
with the ripostes that they  are "unaffordable, impractical, or unnecessary"
 (again see the communications at  the URL above). This is also an artifact 
of CI President Ben Best considering  himself an expert in just about every 
technical area of cryonics, with the added  handicap of being unable to "
weight," scale, or do cos- benefit analyses on  various technologies - as 
well as also frequently lacking the necessary  experience base to understand 
them. In Alcor's case, a culture of exclusion,  fear-driven, and excessively 
risk adverse decision making, coupled with truly  chaotic and incompetent 
management over the past 15 years (at least!) has made  participation by high 
quality medical and scientific people virtually  impossible. Brian Wowk, a 
genuine scientist of high caliber, who is actually on  the Alcor Board, has 
had an incredibly difficult time just maintaining a patina  of "scientific and 
technically competent" patient care. 
9) Given all of the above, I think it is fully justified to say to Maxim, 
in  particular, "Because you have embarked on a vigorous course of action to 
hobble  or destroy a tiny field of endeavor, without making the requisite 
positive  efforts to change it, you have put yourself in a difficult and 
arguably  indefensible position. One of Maxim's working partners, who refers to 
her as  "Mel," recently posted this: 
"Personally I think we are obserivng the last crys from a very damaged  
cryonics industry before it dies completely. In 10 years i think there will be 
a  few dewars around but no active companies once regulation hits them. 
Thres no  conspiracy i suspect to make cryonics a billion $ industry - its too 
shabby and  the companies left are barely keeping themselves afloat let alone 
in LN2 -  Chatsworth 21st century style is on the cards and once regulatory 
officials look  at these cryonics firms properly they will shut them down 
and prosecute the  organizers" - 
_http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,64749,98188#msg-98188_ 
(http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,64749,98188#msg-98188) \ 
That is not productive, and it constitutes the threat of destruction of  
cryonics patients - people who were not only not responsible for the current 
(or  in most cases the past) deficiencies of cryonics, but who are also 
powerless to  defend themselves, and are, in fact completely helpless. How is 
this just?  What good will this do?  
10) A constant theme of Maxim's is that cryonics is "consumer fraud" and 
that  people are being ripped off, and taken advantage of. The working 
definition of  fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain, or to 
damage another  individual. There are several problems with this in cryonics. 
The first and most  serious is the issue of deception. Whether it is 
intentional or unintentional,  there must be deception. It is only necessary to look 
at CryoNet, to  look at Cold Filter, and to look at the reams of internal 
criticism of cryonics  BY cryonicists TO other cryonicists, to understand 
that the vast majority of  people signed up simply don't care. They are 
informed of the screw-ups, the  incompetence, and the often grotesque errors, and 
THEY SIMPLY DO NOT CARE. One  of the really good things about Ben Best's 
nightmarish CI case reports, are that  they constitute due diligence 
documentation to CI members, to prospective  members,and to the public, of just what a 
mess they can expect to have made of  their care. Alcor's and SA's case 
reports express it less coarsely, but the  incompetence is still there, for all 
to see - thus, there is full disclosure.  So, you have a situation where 
BOTH the critics and the cryonics organizations  are telling both members, and 
prospective members, exactly what is  being done - and no one cares. 
This raises the most important issue of all, and that is, how do you change 
 that attitude? External regulation won't accomplish it, because regulation 
is  designed to protect people from harm they are at a disadvantage, or are 
unable  to perceive, or who are in situations where they can be effectively 
lied to.  That isn't the problem in cryonics! The problem is that the "
members" or the  "customers" simply do not agree that high quality, error 
(iatrogenesis) free  care is material to the success of the procedure. Pump air 
during perfusion? No  big deal, "our (supermen) friends in the future will 
sort that out." Have an  extra day, or 3, or 4, of cold ischemia? Not to 
worry, our friends in the  future, with their Nanotechnological repair machines, 
will figure out a fix.  Short of cremation, there is nothing that matters 
to these foolish  people, and THAT is the real problem. The fact that they 
are being perfused by  incompetents, let alone that there are no "Board 
Certified Perfusionists" doing  the job (when, in fact, there are - SA employs 
some of Maxim's Florida  colleagues!) is IRRELEVANT. And that it is irrelevant 
is the problem; and no  government can change that.  
And because cryonics is considered a "life or death matter" by  
cryonicists, if it is effectively banned, by virtue of the  supposed fact (to quote 
Maxim's colleague Arnold) that: "once regulatory  officials look at these 
cryonics firms properly they will shut them down and  prosecute the organizers,"
 it will only be driven underground, where it  will be even further removed 
from public and governmental scrutiny. I would also  note that there is 
often nothing quite so good for popularizing this class of  idea (i.e., 
perceived as essential to survival, and achieving immortality in the  next life) as 
to make it illicit and a crime. Everything from Christianity to  Mormonism 
comes to mind. I think that would be a very bad thing for both the  culture, 
and for cryonics in the long run, and I note with irony that while  I am 
the one being accused of trying to make cryonics into a secret cult,  it is 
Maxim, and others like her, who are really taking the actions that could  
result in just this outcome.  
Finally, all of the people putting big money into wasteful and misguided  
cryonics enterprises are not "the gullible public," but rather long time and 
 experienced cryonicists, and no amount of criticism, nor reasoned 
arguments,  have dissuaded them from doing so to date, nor will they do so in the 
future. He  who has the gold makes the rules; and there is no cure for either 
stupid, or  foolish. - Mike Darwin


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33442

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

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