[I]f feedback is scarce because of a lack of time, this increases the usefulness of going to conferences where you can meet grantmakers and speaking to them.
That sounds worse to me. Conferences are rare and hence conference-time is more valuable than non-conference time. Also, I don’t want to be ambushed by people who are annoyed they didn’t get money, or prospective applicants who are trying to network their way into a more favourable decision.
Mmm, that’s not what I meant. There are good and bad ways of doing it. In 2019 someone reached out to me before the EA Global to check whether it would be ok to get feedback on one application I rejected (as part of some team). And I was happy to meet and give feedback. But I think there is no damage in asking.
Also, it’s not about networking your way in, it’s about learning for example about why people liked or not a proposal, or how to improve it.
So, I think there are good ways of doing this.
Conference time is valuable precisely because it allows people to do things like “get feedback from an EA experienced in the thing they’re trying to do”. If “insiders” think their time is too valuable for “outsiders”, that’s a bad sign.
Getting feedback from someone because they have expertise feels structurally different to me than getting feedback from someone because they have money.
As you noted, it’s not you who “has money” as a grantmaker. On the other hand, it is you who knows what parameters make projects valuable in the eyes of EA funders. Which is exactly the needed expertise.
I’m not implying how this should compare to any individual grantmaker’s other priorities at a conference. But it seems wrong to me to strike it down as not being valuable use of conference time.
Grantmakers aren’t just people with money—they are people with a bird’s eye view of the space of grant proposals. This may not be the same as topic expertise, but it’s still quite important for a person with a project trying to make it fit into the broader goals of the EA community.
My intuition is that grantmakers often have access to better experts, but you could always reach to the latter directly at conferences if you know who they are.
That sounds worse to me. Conferences are rare and hence conference-time is more valuable than non-conference time. Also, I don’t want to be ambushed by people who are annoyed they didn’t get money, or prospective applicants who are trying to network their way into a more favourable decision.
Mmm, that’s not what I meant. There are good and bad ways of doing it. In 2019 someone reached out to me before the EA Global to check whether it would be ok to get feedback on one application I rejected (as part of some team). And I was happy to meet and give feedback. But I think there is no damage in asking.
Also, it’s not about networking your way in, it’s about learning for example about why people liked or not a proposal, or how to improve it. So, I think there are good ways of doing this.
Conference time is valuable precisely because it allows people to do things like “get feedback from an EA experienced in the thing they’re trying to do”. If “insiders” think their time is too valuable for “outsiders”, that’s a bad sign.
Getting feedback from someone because they have expertise feels structurally different to me than getting feedback from someone because they have money.
As you noted, it’s not you who “has money” as a grantmaker. On the other hand, it is you who knows what parameters make projects valuable in the eyes of EA funders. Which is exactly the needed expertise.
I’m not implying how this should compare to any individual grantmaker’s other priorities at a conference. But it seems wrong to me to strike it down as not being valuable use of conference time.
Grantmakers aren’t just people with money—they are people with a bird’s eye view of the space of grant proposals. This may not be the same as topic expertise, but it’s still quite important for a person with a project trying to make it fit into the broader goals of the EA community.
My intuition is that grantmakers often have access to better experts, but you could always reach to the latter directly at conferences if you know who they are.