Hey I’m wondering what you mean by “leave EA” exactly here? First its not clear to me what you mean practically by “leave” exactly? Second FWIW I call myself an Effective Altruist and I don’t feel like I need to sign up to the extent/standards you do to carry that label.
I call myself an EA because I’m committed to “Finding the best way to help others” and “Turning good intentions into impact” (love these from the CEA website). In addition I’ve been impressed by the character and heart of EAs I have met who do Global Development things, and I appreciate the forum development discourse (although there is less material year on year).
I feel like people will have diverse reasons for identifying as an “EA” from your nice list, whether that’s community, the mindset, the online discourse or a combination of them all. Some might have vaguer reasons which is all good too.
Also I suspect I’m just in far less deep than you were here, so its harder for me to identify with your experience. I can also imagine the AI/GCR community and disagreements within it are more fraught than within GHD.
I’m not sure if this is a general question or for me in particular?
I’m happy to take a little responsibility? Although I don’t know what that really means practically. Generally in organisations and movements, the leadership (for better or worse) bears the brunt of the responsibility of failings. I’m not in any EA leadership position so I don’t practically bear much responsibility—just a bit of backlash from anti EA people.
On a personal note I’ve mostly jumped on board after FTX too, and have nothing to do with AI shenanegans. When the next big scandal happens I’ll likely take it on the chin too—I’m not one to run quickly from something I have decided is good.
.It’s just very convenient for people to say they mean their own thing by EA. If that’s true, and the leadership bears the responsibility for the problems, idk why me criticizing EA would be a problem, and yet many rank-and-file perceive it as an identity attack on them. So which is it?
If you claim the strength of the unity of EA you can’t disclaim the weaknesses of the parts.
Hey I’m wondering what you mean by “leave EA” exactly here? First its not clear to me what you mean practically by “leave” exactly? Second FWIW I call myself an Effective Altruist and I don’t feel like I need to sign up to the extent/standards you do to carry that label.
I call myself an EA because I’m committed to “Finding the best way to help others” and “Turning good intentions into impact” (love these from the CEA website). In addition I’ve been impressed by the character and heart of EAs I have met who do Global Development things, and I appreciate the forum development discourse (although there is less material year on year).
I feel like people will have diverse reasons for identifying as an “EA” from your nice list, whether that’s community, the mindset, the online discourse or a combination of them all. Some might have vaguer reasons which is all good too.
Also I suspect I’m just in far less deep than you were here, so its harder for me to identify with your experience. I can also imagine the AI/GCR community and disagreements within it are more fraught than within GHD.
Okay, so what responsibility will you take for EA’s failings?
I’m not sure if this is a general question or for me in particular?
I’m happy to take a little responsibility? Although I don’t know what that really means practically. Generally in organisations and movements, the leadership (for better or worse) bears the brunt of the responsibility of failings. I’m not in any EA leadership position so I don’t practically bear much responsibility—just a bit of backlash from anti EA people.
On a personal note I’ve mostly jumped on board after FTX too, and have nothing to do with AI shenanegans. When the next big scandal happens I’ll likely take it on the chin too—I’m not one to run quickly from something I have decided is good.
.It’s just very convenient for people to say they mean their own thing by EA. If that’s true, and the leadership bears the responsibility for the problems, idk why me criticizing EA would be a problem, and yet many rank-and-file perceive it as an identity attack on them. So which is it?
If you claim the strength of the unity of EA you can’t disclaim the weaknesses of the parts.