Agreed, and though this good evidence about people in EA having a positive experience, it has almost no chance of detecting the people who don’t, since participation is conditional on
1.) The subjects choosing to invest significant time and money in attending EAG &
2.) The subjects’ applications being approved to attend the conference by the organisers.
I’m not meaning to suggest that the application process was actively weeding out negative people, but pointing out there are a number of significant selective processes before people were asked this question. For that reason it’s got limited power to detect anybody who doesn’t have a positive experience of EA, and shouldn’t be used as evidence of no problem.
It is good to hear about positive experiences though, so thanks for sharing it.
Agreed, and though this good evidence about people in EA having a positive experience, it has almost no chance of detecting the people who don’t, since participation is conditional on 1.) The subjects choosing to invest significant time and money in attending EAG & 2.) The subjects’ applications being approved to attend the conference by the organisers.
I’m not meaning to suggest that the application process was actively weeding out negative people, but pointing out there are a number of significant selective processes before people were asked this question. For that reason it’s got limited power to detect anybody who doesn’t have a positive experience of EA, and shouldn’t be used as evidence of no problem.
It is good to hear about positive experiences though, so thanks for sharing it.
Agree 100%.