Would you consider relabelling this series as something other than “bycatch”? Or at least being mindful of the terminology you use within the posts when you refer to people within the EA movement.
I think that certain descriptions (such as “bycatch”) contain within them inherent value judgments that are contributing to the problem at hand.
Specifically, I don’t agree that describing an EA as “bycatch” is helpful to them—not to them as a person, and definitely not to their EA career prospects, which they presumably care about quite a bit. I think it’s insulting, and I don’t want to see the term becoming popularised within EA as a way to describe or classify people within the EA movement.
Would you consider relabelling this series as something other than “bycatch”? Or at least being mindful of the terminology you use within the posts when you refer to people within the EA movement.
I think that certain descriptions (such as “bycatch”) contain within them inherent value judgments that are contributing to the problem at hand.
Specifically, I don’t agree that describing an EA as “bycatch” is helpful to them—not to them as a person, and definitely not to their EA career prospects, which they presumably care about quite a bit. I think it’s insulting, and I don’t want to see the term becoming popularised within EA as a way to describe or classify people within the EA movement.
Thanks for the feedback! Will be renaming it as “underutilization.” I had seen it used both in the original post and elsewhere.