All listed are, to my knowledge, reputable and generally ethical individuals.
Agree with this!
However, these connections represent a larger intermingling in EA that is concerning and representative of a culture rife with conflicts of interest.
Regardless of what we think the answer to the post’s question is, I strong agree with this, and think much more needs to be done by the trustees to make transparent their possible conflicts of interest from being involved with multiple related organisations.
I also continue to believe that there being so few people running so many disparate threads of the EA movement is going to lead to overconcentration of influence, conflicts of interest, and reduced competition in the space regardless of who the individuals are, and that some or all of EV’s subsidiaries should split off (in particular, there should be no formal connection between organisations serving the EA community and those running potentially controversial special ops like purchasing Wytham Abbey, incubating Alameda, etc).
Agree with this!
Regardless of what we think the answer to the post’s question is, I strong agree with this, and think much more needs to be done by the trustees to make transparent their possible conflicts of interest from being involved with multiple related organisations.
I also continue to believe that there being so few people running so many disparate threads of the EA movement is going to lead to overconcentration of influence, conflicts of interest, and reduced competition in the space regardless of who the individuals are, and that some or all of EV’s subsidiaries should split off (in particular, there should be no formal connection between organisations serving the EA community and those running potentially controversial special ops like purchasing Wytham Abbey, incubating Alameda, etc).