Thanks Jeff what makes you less convinced about applying it directly? Im not sure you laid out your issues with it? 100 percent agree it’s only one small rule which only applies in limited contexts and doesn’t solve what’s probably the biggest problem which you laid out (dangerous power differentials unrelated to events) but I think it could make a small positive difference at least.
Yes there would have to be nuance and I would suspect if you were a speaker on a panel this role wouldn’t apply. Or maybe just no romantic stuff during the conference itself for people with less of a power differential?
If someone hosts weekly EA meetups for their community, mostly because they happen to be a local EA whose apartment/house has a good common space and is centrally located, they can’t date anyone in their local EA community, since mostly someone will have attended one of their events within the last month.
If someone speaks at an EAGx they can’t date anyone who attended for 3m, even if the attendee is of equal or higher status/power within EA.
Again there needs to be nuance. Weekly events surely wouldn’t be included, and like I said below I think maybe a speaker could be off limits for the duration of EAGx but then no restrictions afterwards?
I don’t think those are concrete reasons not to apply it, just scenarios where it should be handled differently from the OP’s original scenario
I agree there are so many potential scenarios it would be hard to be fair and consistant.
I don’t think that’s obvious from the post? It describes the AR policy as including “for one month after an evening event” and then recommends community builders adopt this policy.
But I’m not really sure that we disagree on anything—I was trying to answer your “what makes you less convinced about applying it directly?”
Thanks Jeff what makes you less convinced about applying it directly? Im not sure you laid out your issues with it? 100 percent agree it’s only one small rule which only applies in limited contexts and doesn’t solve what’s probably the biggest problem which you laid out (dangerous power differentials unrelated to events) but I think it could make a small positive difference at least.
Yes there would have to be nuance and I would suspect if you were a speaker on a panel this role wouldn’t apply. Or maybe just no romantic stuff during the conference itself for people with less of a power differential?
Example issues with applying it directly:
If someone hosts weekly EA meetups for their community, mostly because they happen to be a local EA whose apartment/house has a good common space and is centrally located, they can’t date anyone in their local EA community, since mostly someone will have attended one of their events within the last month.
If someone speaks at an EAGx they can’t date anyone who attended for 3m, even if the attendee is of equal or higher status/power within EA.
Thanks Jeff
Again there needs to be nuance. Weekly events surely wouldn’t be included, and like I said below I think maybe a speaker could be off limits for the duration of EAGx but then no restrictions afterwards?
I don’t think those are concrete reasons not to apply it, just scenarios where it should be handled differently from the OP’s original scenario
I agree there are so many potential scenarios it would be hard to be fair and consistant.
> Weekly events surely wouldn’t be included
I don’t think that’s obvious from the post? It describes the AR policy as including “for one month after an evening event” and then recommends community builders adopt this policy.
But I’m not really sure that we disagree on anything—I was trying to answer your “what makes you less convinced about applying it directly?”