I think I agree with thisâIâm very pro agency multiplying (this is what I think, e.g. Non-Trivial and Leafâs fellows programmes do particularly well). With EA Bristol, which I run, for example, the plan is to have the social group dynamics be the basis for these discussions, but I absolutely want to target stuff around soft skill development through project sprints, discussions based on fun stuff (e.g. use media to kickstart conversations around ethics and stuff), etc. Rather than explicitly having a session where we âexplore ITNâ, it would be more conversational in nature, with the emphasis being on people exploring these ideas and discussing them, as well as learning through doing (e.g. projects where the ideation is supported by frameworks like ITN) rather than more teachy sessions which create some of the power imbalances I discuss in the post.
I also agree we shouldnât discount the âEffective-firstâ EAs, however, I think by their nature they are more likely to carve out a path for themself and access upskilling resources, independent projects and fellowships with less reliance on a central community. I think we of course could still benefit them with community, but it is harder to cater to both camps at the same time and counterfactually I suspect the altruists benefit more.
Of course, feel free to push back on any of this or correct me if I misunderstood your point. Thanks for the comment! :)
Yup: attract on altruism, upskill on effectiveness. However I have sometimes noticed that altruist-first groups tend to have social ingroup/âoutgroup judgment criteria on how long one has been an altruist (see e.g. the vegan societyâs positions of power being occupied by people with long-time âvegan credentialsâ) rather than focusing on the now and the future. They also can place additional value on ineffectively-altruist actions primarily as social signals (e.g. promoting veganism over lacto-vegetarianism really hard for animal welfare reasons despite the fact that all your lifetime dairy consumption equates to roughly one cow.) Itâs all part of group-bonding against a sort of âenemyâ. And it can be super off-putting to those who are effective but âupskilling on altruismâ, and possibly drive them away. Itâs a social dynamic youâve gotta find a way through as an EA group organiser.
We might see each other sometime! My postdoc sometimes takes me to Bristol, and Iâm keen to get you lot vaguely joined up with NTR-Net that hangs out at your uni. Chris Clay is starting at Bristol doing Maths this yearâwas up with me at EA in the Lakes, is keen.
Awesome, thanks for that additional insight. I agree with the potential for these dynamics and will try to be cognisant of them as Bristol kicks off soon!
Ah, awesome. Let me know if youâre ever around! And yeah, I know Chris. Heâs great. Heâs helping organise this year, so Iâm excited for him to be involved.
I think I agree with thisâIâm very pro agency multiplying (this is what I think, e.g. Non-Trivial and Leafâs fellows programmes do particularly well). With EA Bristol, which I run, for example, the plan is to have the social group dynamics be the basis for these discussions, but I absolutely want to target stuff around soft skill development through project sprints, discussions based on fun stuff (e.g. use media to kickstart conversations around ethics and stuff), etc. Rather than explicitly having a session where we âexplore ITNâ, it would be more conversational in nature, with the emphasis being on people exploring these ideas and discussing them, as well as learning through doing (e.g. projects where the ideation is supported by frameworks like ITN) rather than more teachy sessions which create some of the power imbalances I discuss in the post.
I also agree we shouldnât discount the âEffective-firstâ EAs, however, I think by their nature they are more likely to carve out a path for themself and access upskilling resources, independent projects and fellowships with less reliance on a central community. I think we of course could still benefit them with community, but it is harder to cater to both camps at the same time and counterfactually I suspect the altruists benefit more.
Of course, feel free to push back on any of this or correct me if I misunderstood your point. Thanks for the comment! :)
Yup: attract on altruism, upskill on effectiveness. However I have sometimes noticed that altruist-first groups tend to have social ingroup/âoutgroup judgment criteria on how long one has been an altruist (see e.g. the vegan societyâs positions of power being occupied by people with long-time âvegan credentialsâ) rather than focusing on the now and the future. They also can place additional value on ineffectively-altruist actions primarily as social signals (e.g. promoting veganism over lacto-vegetarianism really hard for animal welfare reasons despite the fact that all your lifetime dairy consumption equates to roughly one cow.) Itâs all part of group-bonding against a sort of âenemyâ. And it can be super off-putting to those who are effective but âupskilling on altruismâ, and possibly drive them away. Itâs a social dynamic youâve gotta find a way through as an EA group organiser.
We might see each other sometime! My postdoc sometimes takes me to Bristol, and Iâm keen to get you lot vaguely joined up with NTR-Net that hangs out at your uni. Chris Clay is starting at Bristol doing Maths this yearâwas up with me at EA in the Lakes, is keen.
Awesome, thanks for that additional insight. I agree with the potential for these dynamics and will try to be cognisant of them as Bristol kicks off soon!
Ah, awesome. Let me know if youâre ever around! And yeah, I know Chris. Heâs great. Heâs helping organise this year, so Iâm excited for him to be involved.