Thanks for the response here! I was not expecting that.
This is a topic that can become frustratingly combative if not handled gracefully, especially in public forums. To clarify, my main point isn’t disagreement with OP’s position, but rather I was trying to help build clarity on the OP-EA relationship.
Some points: 1. The relationship between the “EA Community” and OP is both important (given the resources involved) and complex[1] . 2. In such relationships, there are often unspoken expectations between parties. Clarity might be awkward initially but leads to better understanding and coordination long-term. 3. I understand you’re uncomfortable with OP being considered responsible for much of EA or accountable to EA. This aligns with the hypotheses in my original comment. I’m not sure we’re disagreeing on anything here. 4. I appreciate your comments, though I think many people might reasonably still find the situation confusing. This issue is critical to many people’s long-term plans. The links you shared are helpful but leave some uncertainty—I’ll review them more carefully. 5. At this point, we might be more bottlenecked by EAs analyzing the situation than by additional writing from OP (though both are useful). EAs likely need to better recognize the limitations of the OP-EA relationship and consider what that means for the community. 6. When I asked for clarification, I imagined that EA community members working at the OP-EA intersection would be well positioned to provide insight. One challenge is that many people feel uncomfortable discussing this relationship openly due to the power imbalance.[2]. As well as the funding issue (OP funds EA), there’s also the fact that OP has better ways of privately communicating[3]. (This is also one issue why I’m unusually careful and long with my words with these discussions, sorry if it comes across as harder to read.) That said, comment interactions and assurances from the OP do help build trust.
i.e. For example, say an EA community member writes something that upsets someone at OP. Then that person holds a silent grudge, decides they don’t like that person, then doesn’t fund them later. This is very human, and there’s a clear information asymmetry. The EA community member would never know if this happens, so it would make sense for them to be extra cautious.
People at OP can confidentially discuss with each other how to best handle their side of the OP-EA relationship. But in comparison, EA community members mainly have the public EA Forum, so there’s an inherent disadvantage.
I’m interested in hearing from those who provided downvotes. I could imagine a bunch of reasons why one might have done so (there were a lot of points included here).
(Upon reflection, I don’t think my previous comment was very good. I tried to balance being concise, defensive, and comprehensive, but ended up with something confusing. I’d be happy to clarify my stance on this more at any time if asked, though it might well be too late now for that to be useful. Apologies!)
Thanks for the response here! I was not expecting that.
This is a topic that can become frustratingly combative if not handled gracefully, especially in public forums. To clarify, my main point isn’t disagreement with OP’s position, but rather I was trying to help build clarity on the OP-EA relationship.
Some points:
1. The relationship between the “EA Community” and OP is both important (given the resources involved) and complex[1] .
2. In such relationships, there are often unspoken expectations between parties. Clarity might be awkward initially but leads to better understanding and coordination long-term.
3. I understand you’re uncomfortable with OP being considered responsible for much of EA or accountable to EA. This aligns with the hypotheses in my original comment. I’m not sure we’re disagreeing on anything here.
4. I appreciate your comments, though I think many people might reasonably still find the situation confusing. This issue is critical to many people’s long-term plans. The links you shared are helpful but leave some uncertainty—I’ll review them more carefully.
5. At this point, we might be more bottlenecked by EAs analyzing the situation than by additional writing from OP (though both are useful). EAs likely need to better recognize the limitations of the OP-EA relationship and consider what that means for the community.
6. When I asked for clarification, I imagined that EA community members working at the OP-EA intersection would be well positioned to provide insight. One challenge is that many people feel uncomfortable discussing this relationship openly due to the power imbalance.[2]. As well as the funding issue (OP funds EA), there’s also the fact that OP has better ways of privately communicating[3]. (This is also one issue why I’m unusually careful and long with my words with these discussions, sorry if it comes across as harder to read.) That said, comment interactions and assurances from the OP do help build trust.
there’s a fair bit of nuance involved—I’m sure that you have noticed confusion on the side of EAs at least
i.e. For example, say an EA community member writes something that upsets someone at OP. Then that person holds a silent grudge, decides they don’t like that person, then doesn’t fund them later. This is very human, and there’s a clear information asymmetry. The EA community member would never know if this happens, so it would make sense for them to be extra cautious.
People at OP can confidentially discuss with each other how to best handle their side of the OP-EA relationship. But in comparison, EA community members mainly have the public EA Forum, so there’s an inherent disadvantage.
I’m interested in hearing from those who provided downvotes. I could imagine a bunch of reasons why one might have done so (there were a lot of points included here).
(Upon reflection, I don’t think my previous comment was very good. I tried to balance being concise, defensive, and comprehensive, but ended up with something confusing. I’d be happy to clarify my stance on this more at any time if asked, though it might well be too late now for that to be useful. Apologies!)