Would donors/other members of the community find it helpful if I were to repeat this process and write such a post for EAIF? Note that as I do not do grantmaking for EAIF, my attempts at doing the analagous “modifying and blending grants to form representative fictitious grants” might be missing some key nuances.
“Agree”-vote if helpful relative to the counterfactual, “Disagree” if not helpful; assume my nearest counterfactual is writing some other posts drawn from the same distribution as my past posts or comments, particularly LTFF-related ones.
This is hard to answer without knowing the exact counterfactual. I’d value you going deeper on topics you have the most information on, and my guess is EAIF is not your comparative advantage, but if there isn’t a specific other post you’re excited about I’d much rather have EAIF than nothing. I thought it might be helpful to give ideas of posts I’d be interested in from you, specifically:
what do you want to see in the impact or theories of change section? (related)
the practicalities of living off of grants as an independent. do people ask for enough? how bad is it if you ask for too much? how do you structure work to avoid gaps between grants?
how do you evaluate results from independent researchers?
how do you evaluate the success of grants for upskilling or exploration?
how do you evaluate work from other kinds of independent grant recipients (AXRP and Rob Miles’s youtube channel come to mind, but probably there are more grants that are even harder to categorize)?
Writing such a post for EAIF (even a 5x shorter version) would help me get an idea on what’s the bar for a community project to be ~worthwhile, and especially to easily say “no, this isn’t worthwhile”.
I’m saying this because even this LTFF post updated my opinion about that.
Would donors/other members of the community find it helpful if I were to repeat this process and write such a post for EAIF? Note that as I do not do grantmaking for EAIF, my attempts at doing the analagous “modifying and blending grants to form representative fictitious grants” might be missing some key nuances.
“Agree”-vote if helpful relative to the counterfactual, “Disagree” if not helpful; assume my nearest counterfactual is writing some other posts drawn from the same distribution as my past posts or comments, particularly LTFF-related ones.
This is hard to answer without knowing the exact counterfactual. I’d value you going deeper on topics you have the most information on, and my guess is EAIF is not your comparative advantage, but if there isn’t a specific other post you’re excited about I’d much rather have EAIF than nothing. I thought it might be helpful to give ideas of posts I’d be interested in from you, specifically:
what do you want to see in the impact or theories of change section? (related)
the practicalities of living off of grants as an independent. do people ask for enough? how bad is it if you ask for too much? how do you structure work to avoid gaps between grants?
how do you evaluate results from independent researchers?
how do you evaluate the success of grants for upskilling or exploration?
how do you evaluate work from other kinds of independent grant recipients (AXRP and Rob Miles’s youtube channel come to mind, but probably there are more grants that are even harder to categorize)?
what do you regret not funding?
Writing such a post for EAIF (even a 5x shorter version) would help me get an idea on what’s the bar for a community project to be ~worthwhile, and especially to easily say “no, this isn’t worthwhile”.
I’m saying this because even this LTFF post updated my opinion about that.