> We might need to limit capacity at certain events (whereas previously we always accepted people if they were above a certain bar).
What do you mean by this? I donât get why the policy shouldnât be âalways accept people if they are above a certain barâ. Perhaps the bar should change, but it feels to me like the obvious way of deciding who to accept should be something like âfor everyone who wants to attend, estimate how much value it would produce for them to attend, and estimate how costly it would be, and then accept everyone where value exceeds benefitsâ. It sounds like youâre suggesting doing something elseâwhat other policy are you suggesting following?
It sounds like previously the policy was that they have some threshold they had thought of in advance of setting up the conferencesâletâs say everyone above this threshold is a Qualified Effective Altruist, and their policy is to open the applications for every event and make all the conferences big enough to admit every QEA who applies. But now there is less funding and more QEAs, so individual conferences may have to have higher bars for entry, and they might not admit you even if they think youâre qualified according to the previous standard.
It sounds like previously the policy was that they have some threshold they had thought of in advance of setting up the conferencesâletâs say everyone above this threshold is a Qualified Effective Altruist, and their policy is to open the applications for every event and make all the conferences big enough to admit every QEA who applies. But now there is less funding and more QEAs, so individual conferences may have to have higher bars for entry, and they might not admit you even if they think youâre qualified according to the previous standard.