I do not think the specific term matters much. I mention effects on animals lots of times, so it should be clear that these are the problem, not saving lives per se.
I lean much more to your side than Nickās on the subject matter, but I strongly agree with Nick and Michaelās suggestion that saying the āmeat eating problemā is much less provoking than the āmeat eater problemā. You can actually count myself as another data point that this terminology change makes me feel less uncomfortable. (even as someone who believe this effect is probably real in the short term)
I agree it doesnāt matter too much like you say, but it is a 30 second change that you could potentially make in good faith which could turn blame away from the people involved and focus directly on the problem itself. Thereās also a (low chance but real) potential EA future PR issue here with that framing I think...
Hi Nick,
I do not think the specific term matters much. I mention effects on animals lots of times, so it should be clear that these are the problem, not saving lives per se.
Hi Vasco,
I lean much more to your side than Nickās on the subject matter, but I strongly agree with Nick and Michaelās suggestion that saying the āmeat eating problemā is much less provoking than the āmeat eater problemā. You can actually count myself as another data point that this terminology change makes me feel less uncomfortable. (even as someone who believe this effect is probably real in the short term)
Thanks, Fai. I have changed āmeat-eaterā to āmeat eatingā.
I agree it doesnāt matter too much like you say, but it is a 30 second change that you could potentially make in good faith which could turn blame away from the people involved and focus directly on the problem itself. Thereās also a (low chance but real) potential EA future PR issue here with that framing I think...