Welcome to the Blogger.com site for Alcor Democracy. [More] just below is the latest post-- below that, several of the latest posts by subject line-- and then below that-- the alphabetical index. Finally at the bottom, some useful introductory remarks.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

TANYA-- vs. Dave's responses

TANYA SAID:
> When the Alcor management changed in September 2005
> to the current team, we developed a new policy of
> not talking about what grand plans we have for the
> organization, instead choosing to talk about things
> that we have completed. We implemented this policy
> change because the management team (consisting of
> Steve Van Sickle, Jennifer Chapman, and myself) were
> disappointed members. We were all weary of the empty
> promises, the distinct lack of improvement in
> technical capability and the lack of responsible
> fiscal oversight. (delete)

PIZER'S RESPONSE: I find it interesting that the staff would discover the problems like "empty promises and lack of responsible fiscal oversight" and feel they have to take matters into their own hands. It is bold and brave enough that they mention these things at all under the present system. I believe that in a member-elected system, (a democratic Alcor instead of the present dictatorship), the staff would be able to expose specific examples of which Directors were responsible for these problems, and then the system of standing for re-election would cause their replacement with better ones.

TANYA CONTINUES
> Our staff is highly motivated and productive. We
> have an internal plan of action that the staff has
> been implementing for the last eighteen months. 9delete) It also contains some > underlying assumptions.
> The first assumption is that cryonics will never be
> particularly popular as long as people consider it
> an alternative method for disposing of a deceased
> human body. Cryonics is about saving lives, and
> medical professionals should perform
> cryopreservations in hospitals. (delete)

PIZER'S RESPONSE: I remember the first time Brian Wowk said something as new and interesting like "The reason cryonics can work is that the patients are not really dead." Tanya's observation could be just as beneficial if some Alcor directors could understand this and get the message out there. "Cryonics is NOT freezing people!" "Cryonics is about saving lives!"

Tanya's post goes on a long time telling all the wonderful things they want to do for Alcor and mentions something like "if we only had more funds."

I submit Tanya would have more funds, a lot more funds, if Alcor had changed the way Directors are elected long ago. If Directors would have felt more accountable then the hundreds of thousands of dollars (maybe without exaggeration over a million) would still be there right now. The money that has been stolen or wasted because of bad management.

Then there is the money that never came in because more members don't really feel a part of the organization.

Thought experiment: Imagine you are a dictator. Tell a bunch of people in an organization, or a country, that you love them and respect them, and all the flowery stuff, but that you won't let them have the vote. How does that make them feel about the organization or country?

I submit that being a dictatorship is Alcor's root problem, the fundamental mother of all flaws at Alcor, that allows most of the other problems to happen.

TANYA CONTINUES.
> It is true there have been problems in the past, and
> things are not perfect now either.

PIZER COMMENTS: With all due respect to Tanya, this is an understatement. In one year the Alcor president caused an amount of wealth to get wasted or worse that I believe was more then the total amount of the year's dues. How many companies can loose a whole year's most fundamental income in one stupid mistake. And there have been many many mistakes like this. They got so bad that some Board members created a policy of secrecy to keep them secret.

TANYA CONTINUES:
> Alcor has been
> open and honest about issues we face with the
> membership.

PIZER: Much as I respect Tanya's intentions, I don't think this statement is accurate of some of the Board members actions. The board meets in secret. They discuss the mistakes and they don't tell us about them. Even Tanya above says "It is true there have been problems in the past, and things are not perfect now either." but she does not say what those things are. If you want to be open and honest you tell the members the good and bad things going on. You don't just say there have been mistakes and then don't mention a complete and specific list. This is not Alcor's Used Cars we are buing into. We are depending on Alcor to try to save our lives. This is the highest trust we can have in an organization. But some Directors don't trust us enough to share info about what the problems are. And they don't trust us with the Vote.

It seems to me that nowadays some Directors spend more time trying to hide mistakes then trying to prevent them. Tell us about them. Maybe we can supply some ideas that you guys haven't thought of yet. There are 800 of us. We are not all as stupid as you think we are.

TANYA SAID:
>One of our biggest challenges is cash
> flow management. (delete)

PIZER: Of course it is. Don't keep trying to fix the symptoms, which what cash flow problems are, try to fix the problem, get more cash. Do that by making the leaders accountable for their actions. Do that by making them stand for re-election on their records.

Another way to get more cash flow is to make the members feel more a part of the team. Do that by telling them they can vote for the leaders.

TANYA SAID:
(delete) ..... and we have financial controls in place to > reduce the risk of funds being stolen (or to ensure > any theft is quickly discovered).

PIZER: The better way is to prevent funds, any funds, from being stolen. Are officers and staff and directors and bookkeeping firms and anyone near any money, credit card, financial papers, bonded? Why not? If they were bonded all that money would be paid back by the bonding company. Are we hiring officers and directors that can not pass a bonding check?

TANYA WENT ON WITH A LONG WISH LIST OF THINGS THE STAFF WANTS TO DO. THERE IS NO DOUBT HER INTENTIONS ARE GOOD. BUT NO ONE HAS BEEN DOUBTING HER INTENTIONS. WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOUBTING IS THE STRUCTURE THAT FAILS TO SUPPORT ANY WAY THOSE INTENTIONS CAN BECOME A REALITY IN TIME TO DO US MEMBERS ANY GOOD. SHE ENDS WITH:
>We hope that taking this step will
> grow confidence in our organization and in Alcor’s
> ability to achieve its mission.

PIZER'S COMMENT. It's like an example I gave weeks ago when we started this discussion: Imagine South Africa (or earlier days in the United States) where officials were telling the black people that they wanted their confidence and support in the country but that they can't be trusted with the vote. That is what the Directors are telling the members. I have no argument with Tanya's stated intentions. I differ in that I believe that these wishes will not come about unless we change the way Alcor elects its leaders.

Accountable leaders will give staff with good intentions like Tanya means to get things done.

TANYA'S LAST COMMENTS:
> We welcome your
> thoughts.

PIZER'S LAST COMMENT.
Well, Tanya, YOU might welcome my thoughts, but some Directors don't. When I tried to bring this up subject with the Directors one tried to get me censored in Cryonet and another said if Members don't like the way they run things the members can go join CI.

Like you, the Directors WOULD welcome the thoughts of us Members IF they had to stand before us at election


Respond to this message

No comments:

Alphabetical index of keywords -- sub-keywords

Useful Links

[+] Dave Pizer's blog on this issue of democray at Alcor.

[+] Mark Plus Blog.

Authors of this site--
Current-- Philossifur@yahoo.com