I think a single-digit karma score is right here—I do not have a vote in either direction. The question is asked in good faith, but the post doesn’t really move the discussion forward. That discussion was happened before, so I don’t think the post as currently written adds much value for the median Forum user (which is a major purpose of karma).
As Brad mentioned, an analysis of a specific intervention that OP thinks might be effective would make the post more useful. The potential intervention wouldn’t need to approach GiveWell levels to worth discussing if it included a plausible theory of impact that increased the impact of dollars already committed to this cause.
I also think someone reading about core EA principles would be able to guess some of the reasons this isn’t talked about as much as one might think from the level of broader public interest—lots of eyeballs / interest / resources already on the situation, questions about how tractable the situation is given the major actors at play, etc. So for a higher karma post, I’d like to see someone grapple with those reasons and explain why they aren’t as convincing as they might first seem.
Why are people downvoting this I think it’s a reasonable question.
I think a single-digit karma score is right here—I do not have a vote in either direction. The question is asked in good faith, but the post doesn’t really move the discussion forward. That discussion was happened before, so I don’t think the post as currently written adds much value for the median Forum user (which is a major purpose of karma).
As Brad mentioned, an analysis of a specific intervention that OP thinks might be effective would make the post more useful. The potential intervention wouldn’t need to approach GiveWell levels to worth discussing if it included a plausible theory of impact that increased the impact of dollars already committed to this cause.
I also think someone reading about core EA principles would be able to guess some of the reasons this isn’t talked about as much as one might think from the level of broader public interest—lots of eyeballs / interest / resources already on the situation, questions about how tractable the situation is given the major actors at play, etc. So for a higher karma post, I’d like to see someone grapple with those reasons and explain why they aren’t as convincing as they might first seem.
I agree, karma was −5 when I voted.
Just wanted to say this is a fantastic comment—thank you.