I think the should/shouldn’t do list is too binary. To make it onto this list it needs to be bag in almost all circumstances, which necessarily makes the list and narrow.
A list of things that you should think carefully before doing, and attempt to mitigate the downside risks if you decide to proceed, is more useful IMO. This can be broader and cover more of the grey area issues.
“Here is a list of behaviors/circumstances that tend to be risky. You should give serious consideration to avoiding these circumstances unless you have reason to believe that the risks don’t apply to you. Be very careful if you choose to engage with these.”
In my mind I’m thinking that it is roughly parallel to certain sports or certain financial investments: plenty of people come out fine, but the risks are much more elevated compared to the average/norm in that field (compared to the sports that people normally play, or compared to similar investments). I think that the personal circumstances matter a lot: to continue the financial and sport analogy, some people have the discipline to not pull money out of a bear market, or have years of practice walking a tightrope, and thus they are less likely to be hurt/damaged from certain behaviors.
Something like the following (I don’t like this wording, but the vibe I’m going for):
EAs and EA organizations taking actions on this list should perform a risk analysis. If they decide to proceed, put in-place mitigations where reasonable and appropriate. If necessary, review the risk analysis; for example, if circumstances change or the situation lasts longer than expected.
I think the should/shouldn’t do list is too binary. To make it onto this list it needs to be bag in almost all circumstances, which necessarily makes the list and narrow.
A list of things that you should think carefully before doing, and attempt to mitigate the downside risks if you decide to proceed, is more useful IMO. This can be broader and cover more of the grey area issues.
Can you suggest how you’d word it?
In my mind I’m thinking that it is roughly parallel to certain sports or certain financial investments: plenty of people come out fine, but the risks are much more elevated compared to the average/norm in that field (compared to the sports that people normally play, or compared to similar investments). I think that the personal circumstances matter a lot: to continue the financial and sport analogy, some people have the discipline to not pull money out of a bear market, or have years of practice walking a tightrope, and thus they are less likely to be hurt/damaged from certain behaviors.
Something like the following (I don’t like this wording, but the vibe I’m going for):
EAs and EA organizations taking actions on this list should perform a risk analysis. If they decide to proceed, put in-place mitigations where reasonable and appropriate. If necessary, review the risk analysis; for example, if circumstances change or the situation lasts longer than expected.