Most of these suggestions are too vague to be useful. Before people post, they need to read “Taboo EA should”. And then when making suggestions, you need to be very specific about which actors they apply to and what specifically you want them to do.
e.g. Less “EA should democratize” and more “EA Funds should allow guest grantmakers with different perspectives to make 20% of their grants” (I don’t endorse that suggestion, it’s just an example)
Though I do want to say I appreciate this effort, Nathan!
I think more general claims or questions can be useful as well. Someone might agree with the broader claim that “EA should democratise” but not with the more specific claim that “EA Funds should allow guest grantmakers with different perspectives to make 20% of their grants”. It seems to me that more general and more specific claims can both be useful. Surveys and opinion polls often include general questions.
I’m also not sure I agree that “EA should” is that bad of a phrasing. It can help to be more specific in some ways, but it can also be useful to express more general preferences, especially as a preliminary step.
But for the purposes of this question, which is asking about “specific changes”, I think the person who thinks “EA should democratise” needs to be clear about what is their preferred operationalization of the general claim.
Nathan, who created the thread, had some fairly general suggestions as well, though, so I think it’s natural that people interpreted the question in this way (in spite of the title including the word “specific”).
Most of these suggestions are too vague to be useful. Before people post, they need to read “Taboo EA should”. And then when making suggestions, you need to be very specific about which actors they apply to and what specifically you want them to do.
e.g. Less “EA should democratize” and more “EA Funds should allow guest grantmakers with different perspectives to make 20% of their grants” (I don’t endorse that suggestion, it’s just an example)
Though I do want to say I appreciate this effort, Nathan!
I think more general claims or questions can be useful as well. Someone might agree with the broader claim that “EA should democratise” but not with the more specific claim that “EA Funds should allow guest grantmakers with different perspectives to make 20% of their grants”. It seems to me that more general and more specific claims can both be useful. Surveys and opinion polls often include general questions.
I’m also not sure I agree that “EA should” is that bad of a phrasing. It can help to be more specific in some ways, but it can also be useful to express more general preferences, especially as a preliminary step.
But for the purposes of this question, which is asking about “specific changes”, I think the person who thinks “EA should democratise” needs to be clear about what is their preferred operationalization of the general claim.
Nathan, who created the thread, had some fairly general suggestions as well, though, so I think it’s natural that people interpreted the question in this way (in spite of the title including the word “specific”).