X-Message-Number: 7199
From:  ( RON   SELKOVITCH)
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 15:29:09, -0500
Subject: Times article

 With reference to the Times article which included a sidebar
about cryonics, Olaf Henny said:

<There is an incredible opportunity to reach a *huge* well
educated audience with concise and factual letters to the editor..>

I absolutely agree. This is a unique opportunity to make ourselves
known to a wide audience.

<The important thing is, that we, who are not as well versed in
these subjects stay out of it, and do not use up the print space, that
should go to the more competent.>

There I do not agree.  I believe that the overriding consideration
in the editors decision to publish letters on a subject is whether the
article generated sufficient interest - and that, I would assume is based
more upon the number of responses and less upon the quality of the letters.

As a matter of interest (I hope), I sent a letter to the Times about two
weeks ago on a similar subject. It was in response to an article
about the 25th anniversary of Pioneer 10. The article stated that Pioneer
was on its way into space with a plaque destined to be possibly received by
extraterrestrials in 100,000 years time. I was not published  My letter read:


<To the Editor
The article 'Still Ticking',about Pioneer 10, ends by pessimistically
stating that if it reaches Proxima Centauri in 100,000 years none
of us will be around.
Not necessarily so. I and a number of others who have arranged to
be frozen and stored at our death are optimistic that not only we
will be revived and restored by a more advanced technology but we will
live vastly extended lives.
In fact we may not only be around when Pioneer reaches its
destination - we may be there to greet it.
Ron Selkovitch - cryonicist.>

In my disappointment at not being published, I came up with three
possible reasons;
     1. Not worthy of being published
     2  Too 'way out'
     3  Not sufficient interest in the subject

Item one -I will leave to the reader
Item two -Perhaps to the editor, my letter looked as if it came
from the 'lunatic fringe'
Item three -That's (IMHO) the most likely reason, confirmed, I
think, by the fact that not a single letter was published on the
article.

My suggestion therefore is - Lets all write to the Times
irrespective of our level of expertise.
It should be interesting, and informative to see how many letters
get published, and which ones. Another suggestion. if you feel
you don't have enough expertise, then practice a little harmless
deception. Pretend you are absolutely new to the subject and your
interest was generated by the article.
If we get one letter published we will be ahead. If we get more
than one, its cause for celebration. Remember, even if you don't
get your letter published, you can still take credit if others
are published. Do it now!

Email to:  

Ron S


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7199