Be very, very careful about implying (or even hinting) that other groups are less than optimally effective. We may (or may not? memory is difficult) have done so at our first meeting, which left university staff very reluctant to approve us.
Yeah, I’m not clear on why EAs have been attacking donations to university endowments (e.g. Rob Wiblin here). That’s a good way for the EA movement to make a powerful enemy. I would rather let people figure out that university endowments are a bad donation opportunity themselves instead of us pointing it out explicitly. I would actually advise EAs applying for admission to elite universities to avoid mentioning EA on their applications at all at this point, given rumors that elite universities choose applicants on the basis of projected donations to their endowment. Keep your EA status on the DL, kids.
I’ve found that people in Australia with no exposure to EA get upset when I bring up the ‘curing blindness in developing countries for $60 a pop compared to training a guide dog for $40,000’ example, especially since Guide Dogs Australia is a large and well supported charity here. I agree that being too ‘in your face’ about putting down some charities/orgs for being less effective is probably not a good way to attract people to the movement. It worked for me, but not for many others.
I’d be careful about keeping EA on the DL. It may be necessary for some people early in certain careers, but if we all did that we’d never build the movement! “The loudest voice is always right”, and we have to be loud—but not obnoxiously so!
I’d be careful about keeping EA on the DL. It may be necessary for some people early in certain careers, but if we all did that we’d never build the movement! “The loudest voice is always right”, and we have to be loud—but not obnoxiously so!
Yes, I only recommended it to “kids” (who are applying to college).
Yeah, I’m not clear on why EAs have been attacking donations to university endowments (e.g. Rob Wiblin here). That’s a good way for the EA movement to make a powerful enemy. I would rather let people figure out that university endowments are a bad donation opportunity themselves instead of us pointing it out explicitly. I would actually advise EAs applying for admission to elite universities to avoid mentioning EA on their applications at all at this point, given rumors that elite universities choose applicants on the basis of projected donations to their endowment. Keep your EA status on the DL, kids.
I’ve found that people in Australia with no exposure to EA get upset when I bring up the ‘curing blindness in developing countries for $60 a pop compared to training a guide dog for $40,000’ example, especially since Guide Dogs Australia is a large and well supported charity here. I agree that being too ‘in your face’ about putting down some charities/orgs for being less effective is probably not a good way to attract people to the movement. It worked for me, but not for many others.
I’d be careful about keeping EA on the DL. It may be necessary for some people early in certain careers, but if we all did that we’d never build the movement! “The loudest voice is always right”, and we have to be loud—but not obnoxiously so!
Yes, I only recommended it to “kids” (who are applying to college).