Just saw this post now, really exciting stuff! TLYCS is doing really impressive work. On the basis of your progress, I just became a monthly donor to TLYCS. Keep doing the work you’re doing, and happy as the President of Intentional Insights to collaborate with you on promoting effective giving to secular and skeptic audiences through Giving Games.
I do have a concern about TLYCS using directly observable money moved to recommended charities as its most important metric. This seems to be at contrast with what TLYCS sees as the keys to its success:
Ultimately our success will hinge on our ability to make progress in three areas: reaching more people, converting people we reach into donors, and raising the average gift size per donor.
Using that metric seems to pose the danger of Cambell’s Law, and undermine the ability to assess well the impact of activities like Giving Games, or innovations like the Impact Calculator, etc.
Could TLYCS consider de-emphasizing that metric, and putting more emphasis on things like how much the charities you support think you helped them gain both money and followers—newsletters subscribers, website visitors, etc. A percentage of these will become donors, after all. This might be a richer measure of your key goal, of moving money to effective charities.
Just saw this post now, really exciting stuff! TLYCS is doing really impressive work. On the basis of your progress, I just became a monthly donor to TLYCS. Keep doing the work you’re doing, and happy as the President of Intentional Insights to collaborate with you on promoting effective giving to secular and skeptic audiences through Giving Games.
I do have a concern about TLYCS using directly observable money moved to recommended charities as its most important metric. This seems to be at contrast with what TLYCS sees as the keys to its success:
Using that metric seems to pose the danger of Cambell’s Law, and undermine the ability to assess well the impact of activities like Giving Games, or innovations like the Impact Calculator, etc.
Could TLYCS consider de-emphasizing that metric, and putting more emphasis on things like how much the charities you support think you helped them gain both money and followers—newsletters subscribers, website visitors, etc. A percentage of these will become donors, after all. This might be a richer measure of your key goal, of moving money to effective charities.