That’s a good suggestion, thank you. I hadn’t considered that. I would feel more confident in making a suggestion to the EA infrastructure fund after we implement the improvements and do a follow up analysis. However, the EAIF wouldn’t administer the books themselves—it would probably need to be done via some organization (e.g. CEA).
CEA already gives away many books through the virtual programs, so perhaps getting people onboarded onto those is a good strategy. Alternatively, groups can also apply for funding for book giveaways through CEA.
I could see a book giveaway being offered alongside the virtual programs being potentially valuable—but the question would be if it would have a net value increase, or if it would detract from the value of the programs (due to some percentage of people choosing the book over committing to the program, and then not actually reading the book).
I have a feeling it is probably net positive, and could potentially be a precursor to the virtual program, as it provides more flexibility and less commitment. But again, wider distribution seems to be more of an organization-level implementation than a particularly ‘funding-constrained’ issue.
Thanks for doing this. Have you considered suggesting the EA infrastructure fund funds much wider book giveaways?
That’s a good suggestion, thank you. I hadn’t considered that. I would feel more confident in making a suggestion to the EA infrastructure fund after we implement the improvements and do a follow up analysis. However, the EAIF wouldn’t administer the books themselves—it would probably need to be done via some organization (e.g. CEA).
CEA already gives away many books through the virtual programs, so perhaps getting people onboarded onto those is a good strategy. Alternatively, groups can also apply for funding for book giveaways through CEA.
I could see a book giveaway being offered alongside the virtual programs being potentially valuable—but the question would be if it would have a net value increase, or if it would detract from the value of the programs (due to some percentage of people choosing the book over committing to the program, and then not actually reading the book).
I have a feeling it is probably net positive, and could potentially be a precursor to the virtual program, as it provides more flexibility and less commitment. But again, wider distribution seems to be more of an organization-level implementation than a particularly ‘funding-constrained’ issue.