76 replies to this topic

[xanadu]

I would hate to see John leave or be driven away. From what I've read of his posts, he seems to be a worthwhile person to have around.

[Mind]

You're suggesting that I have placed my "personal goals or recognition" above the goals of the Institute.

Explain how this is so.

Whether it is a conscious effort or not, that is what it looks like from my vantage point when trying to look "from the outside in". What are the results? Two long-term popular, friendly, and knowledgeable leaders have quit, citing your persistent questioning (some would call it badgering) as the reason.

When Aubrey left, you could say he disrespected the Institute through the methods he used and that he was running from an argument. Whatever. The end result is that Aubrey left. No matter who is correct in the long run, it was a set back for the Institute. Someone with political acumen with the best concerns of the Institute in mind would have tried to learn from that incident.....would have tried to find a better way to interact and to make assertions/raise questions so as to not let it happen again. Yet here the Institute is again, losing another nice friend and advisor citing the same reasons as Aubrey. It reminds me of a comment made by Caliban way back when before you became a director:

Secondly, I'm concerned about your tendency for aggressiveness. You can be very harsh in communication, and to some extent that is fine because after I'm gone ImmInst really needs another bad cop in its leadership. But I have always been wrestling with maintaining a balance between no-nonsense and empathy. You, in the past, have had it absolutely wrong, attacking people personally in ways that really hurt your own objectives. Not to dwell on that, do you think you will be able to mellow in a way that is required for a representative of many? To to politics rather than headbanging? This would need to go beyond Jekyll and Hyde.

Whether you know it or not, your writing style in the forums is agressive. What seems like questioning to you, what seems like willpower to you, seems so much like headbanging and verbal fistfights to everyone else. The institute cannot afford more long term knowledgeable members to leave. It took a long time to build up the membership (and leadership) base.

I know you are going to say that your goals are congruent with the Institute, and that Aubrey and John, and maybe Elrond too, are conspiring against you and that the Institute should fight for the most correct anti-aging strategies, and lives are at stake if we don't refine SENS, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Don't bother. I have heard it before. What we need are positive leaders who have the political skills to bring people together (people who might sometimes disagree) and get those people to focus on anti-aging research, anti-aging awareness, immortalist philosophy, etc... Your best recent work was helping to create the new front page for the website. That was positive. That should help raise awareness. It was non-controversial. It was a tangible positive contribution. Endless arguing about highly theoretical future research has ended up being extremely negative. That is the way I see it.

[doug123]

I hereby step down from my post as ImmInst advisor on Biotechology, expressing non-confidence in Harold's leadership. I kindly ask those with the power to do so to please remove all references to me from the leadership pages immediately. My detailed reasons can be found in discussion topics all over the institute. I apologize to those who have valued interacting with me that this has become necessary, and encourage them to re-evaluate the qualities of their current leadership.

John, I'd like you to carefully articulate exactly when and how ImmInst has ever had an effective "leadership." The group seems to be mostly figureheads with no accomplishment under their belt except for Bruce's efforts that were sucessful attempts at teamwork. It's not like you could pretend being a member of ImmInst "leadership" is some kind of illustrious position without attributing your success to Bruce's work or sounding like a delusional person extrapolating from technologies that don't even exist yet.

One of my good friends wrote me this, and it is remarkably true:

..the whole feel of that board is like reading christian fundamentalists argue about the rapture.  "Once the singularity hits we'll all be godlike beings with super brains!"  "Nanotech will save us all!"  "No, not nanotech, cryogenics..."  and it goes on. 

Bruce seems to be able to get this group to work together to accomplish something; meanwhile I think Harold would be excellent in the field of business.

I totally understand why you stepped down, but I personally don't think ImmInst is really more than a discussion board (at this time at least, it can change). Tell us exactly what you want to have changed and how you would change it. If I were you John, I'd just ignore the folks trying to antagonize you at this forum and let the MF forums be the place for the future of your anti aging research. Harold's arguments are so easy to laugh off considering he's done no research of his own...

[DJS]

..the whole feel of that board is like reading christian fundamentalists argue about the rapture.  "Once the singularity hits we'll all be godlike beings with super brains!"  "Nanotech will save us all!"  "No, not nanotech, cryogenics..."  and it goes on.

Odds are we're all going to die of old age.

[doug123]

LOL, I love you, Don.

[DJS]

) No hard feelings Adam.

Even if ImmInst was "just a message board" I don't understand what the problem is with that. I noticed that our google page rank has moved up to a seven (7). That's the same page rank as Infidels (ie, the secular web). If you don't understand how impressive that is I can explain it to you.

[Centurion]

We should do an imminst version of the apprentice, with DukeNukem as our Donald Trump
Edit: I'm not being serious here but still, its a nice thought

[doug123]

I had an idea, but was afraid to offer it because some people reject other people's ideas just because of the individual offering it.

If ImmInst has some money, the group could offer a sum of money (say $5,000?) and call it the ImmInst aging research grant. This can give the BoD something to do. Permit anti aging researchers to submit proposals, set up minimum criteria for accepting them, etc. -- then let the best researchers ideas win! Sure, not every idea will work (ie be effective and in accordance with the mission), but it's the fact that ImmInst could actually make a difference by instigating more and more research. And if any technologies are developed as a result, that would be spectacular.

[DJS]

For the record, I agree with Mind's assessment in toto.

[Centurion]

)  No hard feelings Adam.

Even if ImmInst was "just a message board" I don't understand what the problem is with that.  I noticed that our google page rank has moved up to a seven (7).  That's the same page rank as Infidels (ie, the secular web).  If you don't understand how impressive that is I can explain it to you.

I think it's one of our strengths as a board that we can be perfectly serious and discuss these important scientific issues yet have good fun and discuss more down to earth issues aswell. Purely from an information retrieval standpoint also the more diverse our discussion is the higher the chance of the board being returned as a retrieved result. Issues such as searching aside though, I find the fact that we get to see each other's personal sides truly gratifying and quite special, it forms more of a "community spirit" if I may use such a cliche term.

I think its just absolutely fantastic that people here great real tangible accomplishments done yet I can still sit and have a chat with some of the finest minds in science and business about their taste in music or favourite food.

[doug123]

I do agree with Mind's viewpoint as well. That's why I said Harold should go into business. He doesn't have any research of his own to tout, so he looks silly and makes other researchers feel out of place.

[Centurion]

Nothing wrong with being skeptical or hard to convince, Whether or not Harold has gone beyond that is something I won't begin to debate, partly because as a non researcher I wouldn't believe my opinion on the matter to hold much weight. Having said that I think Harold would do very well at work developing potential approaches to immortality. He has plenty to contribute and is a talented man - there's no point in indulging the notion of prometheus-bashing - that gets us nowhere.

[DJS]

You are correct that there is no longer any point in "Prometheus bashing". I will vote my conscience, but that is as far as my participation in this matter will go.

[doug123]

I'm not bashing Harold. He is perhaps one of the most focused and determined individuals I've ever seen -- and true focus -- in modern business at least -- is highly valuable. Also: I've studied his rhetorical tactics and I've adopted the ones I consider to be most effective. The relentless questioning of scientific methods of other individuals without any comparable research tactic to offer as superior -- I don't really think is effective, however; so I just don't use it.

[Centurion]

I'm not bashing Harold.  He is perhaps one of the most focused and determined individuals I've ever seen -- and true focus -- in modern business at least -- is highly valuable.

I just realised now how easy it would be to assume I was implying you were, considering my post came straight after yours. I never meant to imply you were harold bashing

[doug123]

I'm probably one of Harold's biggest fans. As I said, I've adopted many of his rhetorical tactics. I learned the phrase "your argument is based on ignorance" from him; several others, too.

However, considering Harold could have made each and every comment he did whether or not he was an "director," and I don't see the other ones really doing much either, why remove him from the position? Just for fun?

Edited by nootropikamil, 03 November 2006 - 12:51 AM.

[doug123]

Your best recent work was helping to create the new front page for the website. That was positive. That should help raise awareness. It was non-controversial. It was a tangible positive contribution. Endless arguing about highly theoretical future research has ended up being extremely negative. That is the way I see it.

We almost forgot to recognize the importance of the highly time consuming service Harold (along with Jay, Bruce and a few others) performed on behalf of the Institute...have fun: The LifeMirage Chronicles.

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."

Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love, 1963

US black civil rights leader & clergyman (1929 - 1968)

[mitkat]

(nootropikamil)

(Mind)

Your best recent work was helping to create the new front page for the website. That was positive. That should help raise awareness. It was non-controversial. It was a tangible positive contribution. Endless arguing about highly theoretical future research has ended up being extremely negative. That is the way I see it.

We almost forgot to recognize the importance of the highly time consuming service Harold (along with Jay, Bruce and a few others) performed on behalf of the Institute...have fun: The LifeMirage Chronicles.

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."

Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love, 1963

US black civil rights leader & clergyman (1929 - 1968)

I have respect for Prometheus, he did do some good sleuthing, amongst others during the whole LM gongshow. Some of his other actions, going to other boards, stirring it up on other sites could of been and no doubt was counter-productive to imminst's reputation (or at least to his own). Many users thought he went too far, and as abrasive as ever. The old "the ends justify the means" often requires much more tact. Again with John, I feel he's going too far, getting too personal, and being condescending. I understand if someone thinks that's a good business mindset, but come on...

[doug123]

(mitkat)
Some of his other actions, going to other boards, stirring it up on other sites could of been and no doubt was counter-productive to imminst's reputation (or at least to his own). Many users thought he went too far, and as abrasive as ever. The old "the ends justify the means" often requires much more tact. Again with John, I feel he's going too far, getting too personal, and being condescending. I understand if someone thinks that's a good business mindset, but come on...

I am disappointed that you are taking such a position on this at this time, Tim. It's easy to criticize other people's actions after they are said and done with a nonchalant attitude; but in this case, I must say I think your reasoning needs some serious refinement.

I really don't know if you were following the entire soap opera through every episode (I lost interest quickly myself); but it seems you are unaware that immediately after the "LM" incident, the "other sites" you are referring to did not seem at all disturbed by the fact that an advertiser was misrepresenting himself as a Doctor -- in fact, I do recall a topic in which one of the admins of the "other sites" basically stated that just like Aunt Jamima didn't exist, who cares if someone misrepresents themselves as an MD as long as they pay their fees, right (I'd be happy to link you to the topic through PM, let me know)? Harold was the only individual who was bold enough to go over to the "other sites" and inform them of lies and misrepresentation. Harold has got a hell of a lot more balls than you, Tim; no offense.

[mitkat]

Some of his other actions, going to other boards, stirring it up on other sites could of been and no doubt was counter-productive to imminst's reputation (or at least to his own). Many users thought he went too far, and as abrasive as ever. The old "the ends justify the means" often requires much more tact. Again with John, I feel he's going too far, getting too personal, and being condescending. I understand if someone thinks that's a good business mindset, but come on...

I am disappointed that you are taking such a position on this at this time, Tim. It's easy to criticize other people's actions after they are said and done with a nonchalant attitude; but in this case, I must say I think your reasoning needs some serious refinement.

I really don't know if you were following the entire soap opera through every episode (I lost interest quickly myself); but it seems you are unaware that immediately after the "LM" incident, the "other sites" you are referring to did not seem at all disturbed by the fact that an advertiser was misrepresenting himself as a Doctor -- in fact, I do recall a topic in which one of the admins of the "other sites" basically stated that just like Aunt Jamima didn't exist, who cares if someone misrepresents themselves as an MD as long as they pay their fees, right (I'd be happy to link you to the topic through PM, let me know)? Harold was the only individual who was bold enough to go over to the "other sites" and inform them of lies and misrepresentation. Harold has got a hell of a lot more balls than you, Tim; no offense.

[lol] You don't know the first thing about me.

[doug123]

Ha ha, but you almost make it sound like Harold enjoyed doing all that stuff. I am sure he was really pissed off at being lied to for so long like the rest of us; however, instead of repressing it, Harold did something about it. So in a sense the collective anger was expressed. And I thoroughly enjoyed reading Harold at work. He's a genius, at least partially. I would say his tact is pretty good. Honestly, I would have never gotten really involved in the SENS challenge if it wasn't for the exchanges between him and Dr. de Grey. However, he hit a wall and de Grey left. Then John left...so it's gotta stop now...however, I think this whole thing will end up bringing more progress than otherwise; Harold is correct that " Scholarly, learned debate is one of the pillars of science."

[zoolander]

Does John want to step down because he has lost faith is Harold or because he has lost faith in his own ability as an advisor or been challenged?

I don't believe for one minute that John wants to step down because of Harold. What a facade!

Edited by zoolander, 02 November 2006 - 11:28 AM.

[DJS]

(zoolander)
Does John want to step down because he has lost faith is Harold or because he has lost faith in his own ability as an advisor or been challenged?

I don't believe for one minute that John wants to step down because of Harold.  What a facade!

Some one please air out this thread before the putrid smell of politics overwhelms me.

[doug123]

(DonSpanton)
Some one please air out this thread before the putrid smell of politics overwhelms me.

No sh*t, Don, I can smell that too.

Also: I don't really understand the whole "advisory" thingy at ImmInst.

Until an individual is a PhD or an MD, why put them in an advisory position? It's insulting to the individuals who have really done the work to earn a real PhD or an MD. If I had earned a PhD or MD and was on an advisory board and later learned that the same organization at which I advised at is allowing individuals who are still PhD or candidates or Med school residents to come on board, my intelligence would definitely feel insulted and I would feel compelled to leave immediately.

That's another reason why John and Aubrey might have left. Yes, Harold's attacks on SENS are futile considering he has no alternative nor funding for his ideas.

However, Harold is a "director" -- and I believe a college degree should be the minimum requirement for directorship in the same way a PhD or MD should be the minimum requirement for advisorship.

(prometheus)

What we need is leadership, full stop. Presently there is a mismatched comittee comprised of individuals with no goals, no agenda, no accountability and a disproportionate workload. There is no-one in charge. Whatever happens next, this is something that everyone must accept and act on.

I agree.

I don't like the term "give up;" however, I've withdrawn from my former position that I believe ImmInst can be an effective organization in any immediate time frame. At this time, any individual who wants to be a "director" can be a director. It's not like it's a competitive position or anything and you can't throw it on your resume without damaging your own credibility by appearing highly delusional. And take a look at the so called "leaders" and their so called "accomplishments" -- sorry, but they are limited to Bruce's work. The rest is all talk. To be frank, I'd be too embarrassed to be on the BoD at ImmInst.

From now on, instead of letting any random poster in the forum become a director, elect individuals based on their agenda so when they are elected they can follow through on it and be held accountable.

I would suggest immediately suspending all advisors without a PhD, an MD, or the equivalent. Or maybe you can set the minimum as an MA -- depending on how credible of an organization you want ImmInst to be. However, bringing all these unaccredited individuals absolutely degrades ImmInst's credibility in the scientific community.

In science, you earn credibly, it isn't awarded to you. Similarly, ImmInst has to earn credibility by it's accomplishments, not by extrapolating from technologies that don't even exist yet.

Edited by zoolander, 04 November 2006 - 04:09 AM.

[Lazarus Long]

I don't believe for one minute that John wants to step down because of Harold.  What a facade!

Zoo I am going to weigh in now because I would very much like this to stay on topic. Short of breaking confidence and re-posting his PM to me the definitive answer is yes he is stepping down to avoid continued personal arguments with Harold. John clearly has not lost confidence in his ability as an advisor anymore than Aubrey lost confidence in SENS.

Harold I am the one that originally nominated you and I still hope that something can be constructively made of this situation. Frankly the most significant complaint about you is not what you are saying as much as the way you say it.

If you want confrontations you are certainly getting them and as a leader that is not your responsibility, in fact it is antithetical to good leadership. You are driving away members and sabotaging the very same critical discussions you claim you want to have.

For example when Mind expressed himself above in respect to his criticism in reply to your own statements you responded thus:

QUOTE (Mind)

I know you are going to say that your goals are congruent with the Institute, and that Aubrey and John, and maybe Elrond too, are conspiring against you and that the Institute should fight for the most correct anti-aging strategies, and lives are at stake if we don't refine SENS, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Don't bother. I have heard it before.

(Prometheus)
Perhaps you didn't listen. More likely you did not understand. More importantly, it appears you don't care to. It's the "blah, blah, blah, blah, blah" that counts, actually. The details. The difference between something that can work and a sales pitch. If it's a sales pitch you prefer by all means you are entitled to it. As you know by now, you won't get it from me. I'm into details and I'm into truth. If you have difficulty with this notion ask yourself this: who would you prefer performing surgery on your child - a salesman or someone who does not compromise either his own or others perception of reality?

You respond with a personal attack before bothering with substance. Again if you want combat you are getting it but it is highly unproductive conflict. You lead with a thrust anticipating having to parry but this is not about sales or survival of the fittest; it is about developing an organization for the long haul because anyone who thinks we have the solutions to our quest already in our grasp, or that they will be easily obtained are fools.

I nominated you because I think you are highly intelligent and capable of seeing alternative proposals without following dogma but there are times you appear to lose sight of the fact that your proposals are not only theoretical as well, they are untested. The most productive outcome from debate has been improved models for testing hypotheses but while others are going ahead with that I ask you what studies you actually undertaking in this respect?

You have in many respects mitigated your own effectiveness as a watchdog for scientific validity by the manner of your communications. It appears that you are your own worst enemy at times, like a soldier that goes on fighting after the war has ended.

Another example: there are other leaders here that clearly do not agree with me or I with them about science, politics, the direction of this organization or many other issues but we do not resort to invective for debating our points of view and it is not about simply not airing out our dirty laundry in public or avoiding discussion, we are in accord that as leaders we must set the tone of communication and it is our responsibility to be examples of how to do this right. We stick to the subject and try as hard as we can to NEVER make it personal.

As a leader you are being asked to be political, it goes with the territory and a little more diplomacy on your part would do you far better than improving your attack techniques IM less than HO.

As for this organization we will survive this, and hopefully we will even grow from it. This is an all too common course of events as more and more diverse and conflicting opinion on a topic, as controversial as this, is made the focus of efforts from as diverse and competing interests as we represent but it would be better if we realize now that the debate is not about the direction of Imminst as much as how are we going to get there. Can you step back from making this continuously a zero/sum game Harold?

I know you are intelligent and capable enough to do that so it becomes more a question of values. Do you really think combat is the more productive path than trade and collaboration?

[Lazarus Long]

(adam)
That's another reason why John and Aubrey might have left. Yes, Harold's attacks on SENS are futile considering he has no alternative nor funding for his ideas. Harold hasn't earned a PhD. And Grame is still a PhD candidate.

Adam this part is not valid. Both John and Aubrey spent many long hours in discussion with Harold on topic and I consider the overall result to have been beneficial to progress in the field. They expressed no such resentment specifically about credentials until credentials were made the issue, and not really by them.

Again the main complaint is the sense on their parts that they are being badgered as Mind and others have expressed and this is a question of style more than substance, which I have already addressed. It is also the idea of personalizing debate. In science as much as the advocates of an idea should be passionate in their conviction they must be even more objective in their presentation of those very same ideas.

As to your other attacks on leadership and advisorships those are separate off topic aspects that do deserve their own threads but I suggest that it is better to stay on topic here or you risk contributing much more to the problem than solutions.

[randolfe]

John, I just came back today to tell people that Ray Kurzweil will be on C-Span's "Book TV" show this Sunday from noon till 3 PM (EST) and from midnight till 3:00 AM (EST).

I see that all sorts of "flame wars" are under way. I'm sure your name will always be linked with The Immortality Institute because every post you make gets indexed under your name on the Internet.

[Lazarus Long]

(John)
I hereby step down from my post as ImmInst advisor on Biotechology, expressing non-confidence in Harold's leadership. I kindly ask those with the power to do so to please remove all references to me from the leadership pages immediately.

John is asking to step down as an advisor Randy not to leave the institute.