Hmm, yes, thatâs not what I was trying to say. Edited to change âSome EAsâ to âWeâ, to make it clearer that this is not addressed specifically to people who have experienced harassment.
The first and third bullet point do not have this same issue, as the first one does not explicitly reduce existing opportunities for people
I think this is probably not true: there are probably people considering joining EA who would find EA a much easier place to get funding than their other best opportunities for trying to do the kind of good they think most needs doing.
(Overall, what I was trying to communicate with my comment is that how EA compares to other communities is something that would be relevant to decisions many people might be making.)
I donât think changing âsome EAsâ to âweâ necessarily changes my point of âpeople concerned should not have to move to a different community which may have fewer resources/âopportunitiesâ, independent of who actually creates that different community.
Note that my bigger point overall was why the second bullet point set off alarm bells, rather than specific points on the others (mostly included as a reference, and less thought put into the wording). That said:
there are probably people considering joining EA who would find EA a much easier place to get funding than their other best opportunities for trying to do the kind of good they think most needs doing.
I agree with this. I added âalthough may reduce future opportunities if they would benefit a lot from getting more involved in EAâ after âi.e. someone considering joining EA does not have as much if anything already invested in itâ a couple of minutes after originally posting my comment to reflect a very similar sentiment (however likely after you had already seen and started writing your response).
However, there is very much a difference between losing something that you have, and not gaining something that you could potentially have. When talking about personal cost, one is significantly higher than the other (agreed that both are bad), as is the toll of potentially broken trust and losing close relationships. It could potentially also have an impact cost ignoring social factors,e.g. if people have built up career/âsocial capital that is very useful within EA, but not ranked as highly outside of EA/âis not linked with the relevant people outside of EA, rather e.g. than building up non-EA networks.
That bullet point is also written as âsomeone considering joiningâ rather than âwe shouldâ. âSomeone considering joiningâ may or may not join for a variety of reasons, and is a potential consequence to the community but not an action point. It is the action points/âhow action is approached that seem more relevant here.
should not have to move to a different community which may have fewer resources/âopportunities
To be clear, Iâm very much in favor of efforts to make EA better here. I think the CEA Community Health Teamâs (disclosure: my wife is on that team) work is important, that many EAs need to be more aware of how power dynamics impact relationships (disclosure again), and that fixing this should not primarily fall on the people impacted.
I added âalthough âŚâ a couple of minutes after originally posting my comment to reflect a very similar sentiment (however likely after you had already seen and started writing your response).
Thatâs right, sorry!
I also think the second bullet point is probably not a good idea even if we did know that EA has higher rates of this sort of issues than youâd expect: Atheism Plus didnât go very well! Iâm not saying that any of the three points are things that would definitely be worth doing in that world, but theyâre an illustration about how the information of whether EA does have higher rates would be relevant to decisions people might make.
Thatâs good to hear re in favour of efforts to make EA better (edited for clarity). Thanks for your engagement on this.
Agreed with the necessity for awareness around power dynamics with the nuance of fixing this not having to fall on the people impacted by it. I found it good to see that post when it came out as it points out things people may not have been aware of.
Hmm, yes, thatâs not what I was trying to say. Edited to change âSome EAsâ to âWeâ, to make it clearer that this is not addressed specifically to people who have experienced harassment.
I think this is probably not true: there are probably people considering joining EA who would find EA a much easier place to get funding than their other best opportunities for trying to do the kind of good they think most needs doing.
(Overall, what I was trying to communicate with my comment is that how EA compares to other communities is something that would be relevant to decisions many people might be making.)
Thanks for your response!
I donât think changing âsome EAsâ to âweâ necessarily changes my point of âpeople concerned should not have to move to a different community which may have fewer resources/âopportunitiesâ, independent of who actually creates that different community.
Note that my bigger point overall was why the second bullet point set off alarm bells, rather than specific points on the others (mostly included as a reference, and less thought put into the wording). That said:
I agree with this. I added âalthough may reduce future opportunities if they would benefit a lot from getting more involved in EAâ after âi.e. someone considering joining EA does not have as much if anything already invested in itâ a couple of minutes after originally posting my comment to reflect a very similar sentiment (however likely after you had already seen and started writing your response).
However, there is very much a difference between losing something that you have, and not gaining something that you could potentially have. When talking about personal cost, one is significantly higher than the other (agreed that both are bad), as is the toll of potentially broken trust and losing close relationships. It could potentially also have an impact cost ignoring social factors,e.g. if people have built up career/âsocial capital that is very useful within EA, but not ranked as highly outside of EA/âis not linked with the relevant people outside of EA, rather e.g. than building up non-EA networks.
That bullet point is also written as âsomeone considering joiningâ rather than âwe shouldâ. âSomeone considering joiningâ may or may not join for a variety of reasons, and is a potential consequence to the community but not an action point. It is the action points/âhow action is approached that seem more relevant here.
To be clear, Iâm very much in favor of efforts to make EA better here. I think the CEA Community Health Teamâs (disclosure: my wife is on that team) work is important, that many EAs need to be more aware of how power dynamics impact relationships (disclosure again), and that fixing this should not primarily fall on the people impacted.
Thatâs right, sorry!
I also think the second bullet point is probably not a good idea even if we did know that EA has higher rates of this sort of issues than youâd expect: Atheism Plus didnât go very well! Iâm not saying that any of the three points are things that would definitely be worth doing in that world, but theyâre an illustration about how the information of whether EA does have higher rates would be relevant to decisions people might make.
Thatâs good to hear re in favour of efforts to make EA better (edited for clarity). Thanks for your engagement on this.
Agreed with the necessity for awareness around power dynamics with the nuance of fixing this not having to fall on the people impacted by it. I found it good to see that post when it came out as it points out things people may not have been aware of.