You are welcome to use my cryonics argument map for this purpose and as a base for further work. Use this link rather than the one in the post.
I'd be interested in participating in (but not leading) such an effort.
This would be a useful inclusion in a will. For example, add provisions and funds to transport you to another facility should the one you are in fail, and to another if the second is not available, ad infinitum until permafrost interment.
Eric DeMar did something similar in his will, to ensure his parents (Who'd been cryopreserved by Trans Time in the seventies) would be transported to the CI facilities. A very good choice, considering Trans Time's policies.
A separate decision tree may be included to cover alternatives to cryonics, if the entire cryonics decision tree is exhausted of possibilities: Brain-only chemopreservation as the first alternative, high-temperature vitrification as the second, and so on and on until you decide to simply have your body cremated.
Yes, or to upgrade to a more promising treatment or organization that arrives while in a coma or senile.
In the meantime, could anyone answer the last situation - in which situations is funding SA ($88,000) necessary?
After occasionally researching cryonics over the past couple years, I remain confused about what happens certain situations. Could we create, collaboratively or otherwise, a comprehensive flowchart or decision tree that represents what options exist if, for example, one is a member of CI, but has not yet funded the procedure, and enters a life-threatening coma? Or which situations one needs to fund SA for standby or transport?
This or something like it seems like low-hanging fruit for preventing cryocrastination, at least in my case - I want to fully understand the system before investing in it.