Alcor-- Canadian case-- funding problem--

[+] Funny how regular members like me absolutely have to have funding in place in order to have an account with Alcor-- and this guy from Canada seems to have not have had that in place as required for regular Alcor members. The decision to accept cases like this-- without a lockdown on the funds in advance-- insults the regular members who work years to make sure their funding is in place... and risks money that Alcor should not be "gambling' with like this. As a Classical SuperHumanist, I would say that it's time for Canada-- as a sovereign nation-state-- to not only become a republic and eliminate the Governer General's position, but also to establish a cryonics program for Canadians for those who want it. The new government dept. should be called Cryonics Canada-- and it should be based in Ottawa, the Canadian capital. I should be appointed to manage it. If the Prime Minister contacts me, I'll seriously consider the offer.

Wed., Sept. 5, 2007 Update
FD points out only one aspect of this that I'm interested in-- he writes "since when is provision in a will considered to be valid funding"? The idea that that the straight freeze was less costly and that funding would represent a wad of cash is something other than cryonics, in my view. I think cryonics and Alcor need to tighten up the definitions of cryonics and cryonicist. Every business has its dreg cases-- I suppose-- but the issue of where to draw the line becomes a problem at some point. In other words, is cryonics being based on principle and defniitions or opportunistically and unprincipled?