I don’t think it’s as much of a transparency concern if Good Ventures neglects to say that they would otherwise give the money to “opportunity they consider approximately as valuable” next year, than if they were literally going to donate $5 million that year regardless of how much the public donated.
I agree that it’s not as bad, but I’m trying to look at things from the perspective of someone who’s considering someone else’s offer to match. From that perspective there’s not actually that much difference between “counterfactually null match because of precommitment to give $5M” and “counterfactually null match because the unmatched money went to something of nearly equal value to you”.
I agree that it’s not as bad, but I’m trying to look at things from the perspective of someone who’s considering someone else’s offer to match. From that perspective there’s not actually that much difference between “counterfactually null match because of precommitment to give $5M” and “counterfactually null match because the unmatched money went to something of nearly equal value to you”.
Yeah, I think we agree on everything except possibly what “counterfactually valid” should mean.