Thanks for the write-up! I agree with Chris that the natural functions can vary substantially, and Ulrik’s comment shows how (another example could be a policy focus in EA DC and EA Brussels). But there are for sure many universal things like the ones you mentioned.
My main nitpick is with the term. I don’t see why “local EA groups” isn’t good enough. There are already so many abbreviations within the EA movement that it gets overwhelming. If you read “MEAROs” you have no idea what you’re talking about without prior context, while “local EA groups” is very clear and not even that long. The term covers points 1 and 2 of your definition (“local” means it’s regional and “EA group” already signals it’s meta). Differentiating local groups with and without an organizational structure doesn’t seem particularly useful. I assume most unstructured local EA groups aspire to get such a structure, and many of the present and future values listed also apply to them.
I’m ambivalent about jargon; strongly pro when it seems sufficiently useful, but opposed to superfluous usage. One benefit I can see for MEARO is that it isn’t nominatively restricted to community building like most “local EA groups.”
I recently attended a talk at EAGxLatAm by Doebem, a Brazilian based and locally focused equivalent of GiveWell, that made a decent case for the application of EA principles to “think global, act local.” Their work is very distinct from EA Brazil, but it falls solidly into regional and meta EA, and I think there is strong potential for other similar orgs that would work tightly with local CB groups but have different focus.
Thanks for the write-up! I agree with Chris that the natural functions can vary substantially, and Ulrik’s comment shows how (another example could be a policy focus in EA DC and EA Brussels). But there are for sure many universal things like the ones you mentioned.
My main nitpick is with the term. I don’t see why “local EA groups” isn’t good enough. There are already so many abbreviations within the EA movement that it gets overwhelming. If you read “MEAROs” you have no idea what you’re talking about without prior context, while “local EA groups” is very clear and not even that long. The term covers points 1 and 2 of your definition (“local” means it’s regional and “EA group” already signals it’s meta). Differentiating local groups with and without an organizational structure doesn’t seem particularly useful. I assume most unstructured local EA groups aspire to get such a structure, and many of the present and future values listed also apply to them.
I’m ambivalent about jargon; strongly pro when it seems sufficiently useful, but opposed to superfluous usage. One benefit I can see for MEARO is that it isn’t nominatively restricted to community building like most “local EA groups.”
I recently attended a talk at EAGxLatAm by Doebem, a Brazilian based and locally focused equivalent of GiveWell, that made a decent case for the application of EA principles to “think global, act local.” Their work is very distinct from EA Brazil, but it falls solidly into regional and meta EA, and I think there is strong potential for other similar orgs that would work tightly with local CB groups but have different focus.