It’s my impression it’s a handful of coordinator organizations in EA who think it’s not clear the sign of outreach is positive. It’s my impression from most individual effective altruists I talk to, and I expect this would extend to their opinion as a bloc, the sign of outreach, even after taking into account the possibility of rogue/unilateral actors, is moderately positive.
But should we not expect coordinator organizations to be the ones best placed to have considered the issue?
My impression is that they have developed their view over a fairly long time period after a lot of thought and experience.
Yes, but I think the current process isn’t inclusive of input from as many EA organizations as it could or should be. It appears it might be as simple as the CEA having offices in Berkeley and Oxford meaning they receive a disproportionate amount of input on EA from those organizations, as opposed to EA organizations whose staff are geographically distributed and/or don’t have an office presence near the CEA. I think the CEA should still be at the centre of making these decisions, and after recent feedback from Max Dalton from the CEA on the EA Handbook 2.0, I expect they will make a more inclusive process for feedback on outreach materials.
I’m not quite sure what argument you are trying to make with this comment.
I interpreted your original comment as arguing for something like:
“Although most of the relevant employees at central coordinator organisations are not sure about the sign of outreach, most EAs think it is likely to be positive, thus it is likely to in fact be positive”.
Where I agree with first two points but not the conclusion, as I think we should consider the staff at the ‘coordinator organizations’ to be the relevant expert class and mostly defer to their judgement.
Its possible you were instead arguing “The increased concern about downside risk has also made it much harder to ‘use up’ your dedication” is not in fact a concern faced by most EAs, since they still think outreach is clearly positive, so this is not a discouraging factor.
I somewhat agree with this point, but based on your response to cafelow I do not think it is very likely to be the point you were trying to make.