Similarly, the EA hotel has weekly check-ins to gauge the progress of their participants, and is working on implementing more stringent feedback loops for the people who enter the hotel. The goal, instead of trying to vet the people and projects up front, is to use the process itself to vet the project and the individual. As they pass increasingly high bars, they eventually cross the bar where they achieve good evidence for their project, and can then move on to the next stage of the pyramid.
Has anyone been asked to leave the EA Hotel because they weren’t making enough progress, or because their project didn’t turn out very well?
If not, do you think the people responsible for making that decision have some idea of when doing so would be correct?
Has anyone been asked to leave the EA Hotel because they weren’t making enough progress, or because their project didn’t turn out very well?
Not yet (I don’t think. Maybe Toon or Greg can chime in here), but the hotel has noticed this and is working on procedures to have better feedback loops.
If not, do you think the people responsible for making that decision have some idea of when doing so would be correct?
As I understand it, the trustees are currently working to develop standards for this.
Has anyone been asked to leave the EA Hotel because they weren’t making enough progress, or because their project didn’t turn out very well?
If not, do you think the people responsible for making that decision have some idea of when doing so would be correct?
Not yet (I don’t think. Maybe Toon or Greg can chime in here), but the hotel has noticed this and is working on procedures to have better feedback loops.
As I understand it, the trustees are currently working to develop standards for this.