meta: I considered commenting, but instead I’m just flagging that I find it somewhat hard to have an open discussion about the EA hotel on the EA forum in the fundraising context. The feeling part is
there is a lot of emotional investment in EA hotel,
it seems if the hotel runs out of runway, for some people it could mean basically loosing their home.
Overall my impression is posting critical comments would be somewhat antisocial, posting just positives or endorsements is against good epistemics, so the personally safest thing to do for many is not to say anything.
At the same time it is blatantly obvious there must be some scepticism about both the project and the outputs: the situation when the hotel seems to be almost out of runway repeats. While eg EA funds collect donations basically in millions $ per year, EA hotel struggles to collect low tens of $.
I think this equilibrium where
people are mostly silent but also mostly not supporting the hotel, at least financially
the the financial situation of the project is somewhat dire
talks with EA Grants and the EA Long Term Future Fund are in progress but the funders are not funding the project yet
is not good for anyone, and has some bad effects for the broader community. I’d be interested in ideas how to move out of this state.
I agree that the epistemic dynamics of discussions about the EA Hotel aren’t optimal. I would guess that there are selection effects; that critics aren’t heard to the same extent as supporters.
Relatedly, the amount of discussion about the EA Hotel relative to other projects may be a bit disproportionate. It’s a relatively small project, but there are lots of posts about it (see OP). By contrast, there is far less discussion about larger EA orgs, large OpenPhil grants, etc. That seems a bit askew to my mind. One might wonder about the cost-effectiveness of relatively long discussions about small donations, given opportunity costs.
In fairness, a lot of the larger grants/projects are not seeking funding from smaller donors, so discussing (e.g.) OpenPhil’s latest grants may not be hugely action relevant.
I’d also guess that some critics may not be saying much not because they’re put off by sounding mean, but rather their critical view arises from their impression of the existing evidence/considerations rather than from something novel to the existing discussion. If (e.g.) one believes the hotel has performed poorly in terms of outputs given inputs it seems unnecessary to offer that as commentary: folks (and potential donors) can read the OP and related documents themselves and come to their own conclusion.
I agree that the “equilibrium” you describe is not great, except I don’t think it is an equilibrium; more that, due to various factors, things have been moving slower than they ideally should have.
EA hotel struggles to collect low tens of $
I’m guessing you meant tens-of-thousands. It’s actually mid-tens-of-thousands of $: £44.2k~$57k (from 69 unique donors) as of writing (not counting the money I’ve put in).
Regarding emotional investment, I agree that there is a substantial amount of it in the EA Hotel. But I don’t think there is significantly more than there is for any new EA project that several people put a lot of time and effort into. And for many people, not being able to do the work they want to do (i.e. not getting funded/paid to do it) is at least as significant as not being able to live where they want to live.
Still, you’re right in that critical comments can (often) be perceived as being antisocial. I think part of the reason that EA is considered by new people/outsiders to not be so welcoming can be explained by this.
meta: I considered commenting, but instead I’m just flagging that I find it somewhat hard to have an open discussion about the EA hotel on the EA forum in the fundraising context. The feeling part is
there is a lot of emotional investment in EA hotel,
it seems if the hotel runs out of runway, for some people it could mean basically loosing their home.
Overall my impression is posting critical comments would be somewhat antisocial, posting just positives or endorsements is against good epistemics, so the personally safest thing to do for many is not to say anything.
At the same time it is blatantly obvious there must be some scepticism about both the project and the outputs: the situation when the hotel seems to be almost out of runway repeats. While eg EA funds collect donations basically in millions $ per year, EA hotel struggles to collect low tens of $.
I think this equilibrium where
people are mostly silent but also mostly not supporting the hotel, at least financially
the the financial situation of the project is somewhat dire
talks with EA Grants and the EA Long Term Future Fund are in progress but the funders are not funding the project yet
is not good for anyone, and has some bad effects for the broader community. I’d be interested in ideas how to move out of this state.
I agree that the epistemic dynamics of discussions about the EA Hotel aren’t optimal. I would guess that there are selection effects; that critics aren’t heard to the same extent as supporters.
Relatedly, the amount of discussion about the EA Hotel relative to other projects may be a bit disproportionate. It’s a relatively small project, but there are lots of posts about it (see OP). By contrast, there is far less discussion about larger EA orgs, large OpenPhil grants, etc. That seems a bit askew to my mind. One might wonder about the cost-effectiveness of relatively long discussions about small donations, given opportunity costs.
In fairness, a lot of the larger grants/projects are not seeking funding from smaller donors, so discussing (e.g.) OpenPhil’s latest grants may not be hugely action relevant.
I’d also guess that some critics may not be saying much not because they’re put off by sounding mean, but rather their critical view arises from their impression of the existing evidence/considerations rather than from something novel to the existing discussion. If (e.g.) one believes the hotel has performed poorly in terms of outputs given inputs it seems unnecessary to offer that as commentary: folks (and potential donors) can read the OP and related documents themselves and come to their own conclusion.
.
Flagging that there has been a post specifically soliciting reasons against donating to the EA Hotel:
$100 Prize to Best Argument Against Donating to the EA Hotel
And also a Question which solicited critical responses:
Why is the EA Hotel having trouble fundraising?
I agree that the “equilibrium” you describe is not great, except I don’t think it is an equilibrium; more that, due to various factors, things have been moving slower than they ideally should have.
I’m guessing you meant tens-of-thousands. It’s actually mid-tens-of-thousands of $: £44.2k~$57k (from 69 unique donors) as of writing (not counting the money I’ve put in).
Regarding emotional investment, I agree that there is a substantial amount of it in the EA Hotel. But I don’t think there is significantly more than there is for any new EA project that several people put a lot of time and effort into. And for many people, not being able to do the work they want to do (i.e. not getting funded/paid to do it) is at least as significant as not being able to live where they want to live.
Still, you’re right in that critical comments can (often) be perceived as being antisocial. I think part of the reason that EA is considered by new people/outsiders to not be so welcoming can be explained by this.
Thanks for fleshing this out.