Do you have an alternate suggestion for how flaws and mistakes made by projects in the EA sphere can be discovered?
As a scientist, one of the reasons people trust our work is the expectation that the work we publish has been vetted and checked by other experts in the field (and even with peer review, sloppy work gets published all the time). Isn’t one of the goals of the EA forum to crowdsource at least some of this valuable scrutiny?
Do you have an alternate suggestion for how flaws and mistakes made by projects in the EA sphere can be discovered?
As a scientist, one of the reasons people trust our work is the expectation that the work we publish has been vetted and checked by other experts in the field (and even with peer review, sloppy work gets published all the time). Isn’t one of the goals of the EA forum to crowdsource at least some of this valuable scrutiny?
I agree that this is one of the upsides of criticism on the forum. I don’t think it outweighs the costs in many cases.