I find it curious you fail to engage with any of the other responses, and consider your time better spent on looking for dirt on people’s Facebooks and Linkedins, especially since you claim:
This is a sincere question. Not intended to cause controversy.
That notwithstanding, I was not attempting to be patronising. I simply expected people (especially SPARC alum) who make strong claims on the forum to have a strong evidence base backing those claims up—for example, you question the validity of internal Atlas polling on the basis of respondents lying and bad survey methodology.
I’m assuming based off of your reply that your beliefs are influenced more by your priors than by having well-evidenced research or data on this, which is fine, but in that case, I think it would have been useful if you had flagged that level of epistemic confidence or rephrased your assertive claims in the original post!
On the object level, none of these seem to be great priors. There’s no evidence for what non-trivial’s scholarships have attracted, it’s not clear that any of the projects you listed in the twitter thread about Stripe Atlas are the sort of thing Atlas would be trying to attract and in the case of Emergent Ventures, the “s” is doing a lot of work for you, since most grants are significantly higher than $1,000 and closer to the order of $10,000.
I find it curious you fail to engage with any of the other responses, and consider your time better spent on looking for dirt on people’s Facebooks and Linkedins, especially since you claim:
That notwithstanding, I was not attempting to be patronising. I simply expected people (especially SPARC alum) who make strong claims on the forum to have a strong evidence base backing those claims up—for example, you question the validity of internal Atlas polling on the basis of respondents lying and bad survey methodology.
I’m assuming based off of your reply that your beliefs are influenced more by your priors than by having well-evidenced research or data on this, which is fine, but in that case, I think it would have been useful if you had flagged that level of epistemic confidence or rephrased your assertive claims in the original post!
On the object level, none of these seem to be great priors. There’s no evidence for what non-trivial’s scholarships have attracted, it’s not clear that any of the projects you listed in the twitter thread about Stripe Atlas are the sort of thing Atlas would be trying to attract and in the case of Emergent Ventures, the “s” is doing a lot of work for you, since most grants are significantly higher than $1,000 and closer to the order of $10,000.
There is a difference between failing to engage and choosing not to engage.
Your tone is very patronising here. I suggest rewording this.