One big thing that’s missing from this post is where does the balance lie today? Perhaps when talking to EAs it seems like there’s more excited about meta stuff (edit: and you’d expect a strong selection effect here—the people who run movement building activities will be the most keen on it), but if you look at the balance of where the money is going, it’s heavily weighted towards object level activities.
In 2014, about $40m of funding was allocated on the basis of GiveWell’s recommendations, whereas only a couple of million dollars was spent on meta activities.
http://www.givewell.org/about/impact
These worries are real worries to look out for, but when less than 5% of resources are going into meta, it’s difficult to think they’re an issue today.
You approvingly cite Jeff’s 50:50 recommendation, which would actually involve a huge ramping up of meta activities from today.
You approvingly cite Jeff’s 50:50 recommendation, which would actually involve a huge ramping up of meta activities from today.
This is a fair criticism and something I did think a good deal about. However, my point was not to advise the world as a whole, but to advise the readers of the EA forum. My understanding is that the typical reader of the EA forum is a lot more predisposed to meta-orgs.
Remember that I have to say something that is true, insightful, and actionable. Even if it is true that meta-orgs are underfunded in the global community, there’s little insight or actionable advice there. Getting people to see potential pitfalls of meta-orgs that I see very little discussion about is more insightful and actionable for the readers here.
Ok, we get into a similar problem with earning to give. For new people, I want to encourage them to etg, but for people already heavily involved in the community, I want them to probably do it less.
If this is how you feel though, I think you could have been a lot clearer.
e.g. “I’m not sure if we need more or less meta, but here’s some arguments against meta that I don’t see raised often enough”
or “The EA movement as a whole probably needs more meta, but it seems like too many of the most involved EAs are focused on it”
One big thing that’s missing from this post is where does the balance lie today? Perhaps when talking to EAs it seems like there’s more excited about meta stuff (edit: and you’d expect a strong selection effect here—the people who run movement building activities will be the most keen on it), but if you look at the balance of where the money is going, it’s heavily weighted towards object level activities.
In 2014, about $40m of funding was allocated on the basis of GiveWell’s recommendations, whereas only a couple of million dollars was spent on meta activities. http://www.givewell.org/about/impact
These worries are real worries to look out for, but when less than 5% of resources are going into meta, it’s difficult to think they’re an issue today.
You approvingly cite Jeff’s 50:50 recommendation, which would actually involve a huge ramping up of meta activities from today.
This is a fair criticism and something I did think a good deal about. However, my point was not to advise the world as a whole, but to advise the readers of the EA forum. My understanding is that the typical reader of the EA forum is a lot more predisposed to meta-orgs.
Remember that I have to say something that is true, insightful, and actionable. Even if it is true that meta-orgs are underfunded in the global community, there’s little insight or actionable advice there. Getting people to see potential pitfalls of meta-orgs that I see very little discussion about is more insightful and actionable for the readers here.
Ok, we get into a similar problem with earning to give. For new people, I want to encourage them to etg, but for people already heavily involved in the community, I want them to probably do it less.
If this is how you feel though, I think you could have been a lot clearer.
e.g. “I’m not sure if we need more or less meta, but here’s some arguments against meta that I don’t see raised often enough”
or “The EA movement as a whole probably needs more meta, but it seems like too many of the most involved EAs are focused on it”