Given how the Oxford group has become the most relevant internationally in the academic research of X-risk is hard to argue against his tenure.
Disagree. The relevance here is what FHI will accomplish in the future, not what it has accomplished in the past. And it seems clear that it is not hard to argue against his tenure as people are clearly doing just that.
Beyond that, my main claim is about the mail incident.
Disagree with you as well, but I am going to stand by my desire to not relitigate the apology here and instead defer that conversation to other threads.
Disagree. The relevance here is what FHI will accomplish in the future, not what it has accomplished in the past. And it seems clear that it is not hard to argue against his tenure as people are clearly doing just that.
Disagree with you as well, but I am going to stand by my desire to not relitigate the apology here and instead defer that conversation to other threads.