The Centre for Effective Altruism has had to deal with a lot of questions about Bankman-Fried since FTX’s collapse. Here’s an FAQ put together by the Effective Altruism Forum.
Which is of course patently false. What does it mean for a forum to put together an FAQ? Have Semafor ever used a forum before?
If you interpret “the Effective Altruism Forum” as a metonym for “the people who use the forum”, then it is true (like how you can say “Twitter is going nuts over this”).
It’s weird, but I don’t see any reason to make a fuss about it.
If someone says “Twitter is going nuts over this” and I learned the source was one Tweet, I’d consider what they said to be pretty inaccurate. (There is a bit of nuance here since your post is highly upvoted and Twitter has more users than EAF, but I would also think “EA Twitter is going nuts” over one highly liked Tweet by an EA to be a severe exaggeration).
Similarly, this FAQ was never put together by either a) the EAF team, or b) crowdsourced from a bunch of users.
The Centre for Effective Altruism has had to deal with a lot of questions about Bankman-Fried since FTX’s collapse. Here’s an FAQ put together by the Effective Altruism Forum.
I expect most people reading this to think of this FAQ as substantially more official than what your own caveats at the top of the page said.
The Centre for Effective Altruism has had to deal with a lot of questions about Bankman-Fried since FTX’s collapse. Here’s an FAQ Hamish Doodles, a user on the Effective Altruism Forum, put together in a personal capacity.
The “correction” is:
Which is of course patently false. What does it mean for a forum to put together an FAQ? Have Semafor ever used a forum before?
If you interpret “the Effective Altruism Forum” as a metonym for “the people who use the forum”, then it is true (like how you can say “Twitter is going nuts over this”).
It’s weird, but I don’t see any reason to make a fuss about it.
If someone says “Twitter is going nuts over this” and I learned the source was one Tweet, I’d consider what they said to be pretty inaccurate. (There is a bit of nuance here since your post is highly upvoted and Twitter has more users than EAF, but I would also think “EA Twitter is going nuts” over one highly liked Tweet by an EA to be a severe exaggeration).
Similarly, this FAQ was never put together by either a) the EAF team, or b) crowdsourced from a bunch of users.
I expect most people reading this to think of this FAQ as substantially more official than what your own caveats at the top of the page said.
The Centre for Effective Altruism has had to deal with a lot of questions about Bankman-Fried since FTX’s collapse. Here’s an FAQ Hamish Doodles, a user on the Effective Altruism Forum, put together in a personal capacity.
I gather that you think it’s an issue worth correcting? Feel free to suggest a more correct phrasing for semafor and I’ll pass it on.