I’m not commenting on this change specifically, but as someone who is a long-term EA but not working in EA full-time, I find there are way too many name changes in EA. Name changes are hugely expensive (both in terms of costs, lost brand equity and confusion among ‘customers’) so should not be taken lightly.
Ambitious Impact was an example in which the need for a change was unusually clear. The organization was moving into domains other than incubating new charities, and so the old name was likely to create inaccurate impressions about what the org actually did.
I’m not commenting on this change specifically, but as someone who is a long-term EA but not working in EA full-time, I find there are way too many name changes in EA. Name changes are hugely expensive (both in terms of costs, lost brand equity and confusion among ‘customers’) so should not be taken lightly.
I agree, although i thought Ambitious Impact was an example of a good one, great name better than the original and made a lot of sense.
Ambitious Impact was an example in which the need for a change was unusually clear. The organization was moving into domains other than incubating new charities, and so the old name was likely to create inaccurate impressions about what the org actually did.