quite a bit of danger in rapid movement growth of attracting people who might dilute the EA movement and impair the building of good infrastructure down the road (see this video* and paper**).
Things I do get: Building a movement with ignorant people may not be good. But becoming veg*an or signing the GWWC pledge and following through is all it really takes. Every EA doesn’t have to be super knowledgeable.
Users on a website is one thing. For example, each StackExchange needs a healthy balance of participants for good questions and equally good answers. But effective giving is really all I see that matters.
Sure, it’s not directly EA. But so what? Effective giving is related to EA. It doesn’t have to be EA. Or maybe I just didn’t read closely enough.
Note to self:
*Movement Development—Kerry Vaughan—EA Global 2015
I do not understand.
Things I do get: Building a movement with ignorant people may not be good. But becoming veg*an or signing the GWWC pledge and following through is all it really takes. Every EA doesn’t have to be super knowledgeable.
Users on a website is one thing. For example, each StackExchange needs a healthy balance of participants for good questions and equally good answers. But effective giving is really all I see that matters.
Sure, it’s not directly EA. But so what? Effective giving is related to EA. It doesn’t have to be EA. Or maybe I just didn’t read closely enough.
Note to self:
*Movement Development—Kerry Vaughan—EA Global 2015
**How valuable is movement growth?