One note of caution: there are some important data privacy concerns here. A public list like this could be used to spam or harass researchers. Asking for researcher permission to include their name and information and a mechanism for people to opt out later seems important.
Thanks. Do you see a particular vector or case where harassment might be a risk? I’m thinking that for a list of “researchers who do work on global priorities” or “researchers who have spoken at EA global conference” this is akin to existing public lists of researchers by field and this not a big threat.
If instead this was a list reflecting, e.g., deeply personal views or political affiliations it could be more problematic.
And you are right that we should notify people who are on the list and allow them to ask to have their names removed.
Do you see a particular vector or case where harassment might be a risk?
There is precedence for episodes of harassment in the community [1]. One motivated and misguided individual could use this list to conduct more harassment in the future.
There is also precedence for scams directed at academics—I remember distinctly one such scam where one of my colleague’s account was spoofed and they tried to scam money out of me.
Overall I agree that this is less risky than a list of people who share a particular belief, and as risky as other public lists of scientists by field. But I think this these previous lists are also iffy and maybe should be more private.
There are some lists circulating in the community which are not public but are free to be shared privately. I think this is a good model to imitate, where people interested in accessing the database could reach out to you for access, stating their purpose in the process.
Thanks. I’ll be careful about this. In principle, there is no reason I would need to make this list public. Perhaps a ‘by-invitation Airtable’ would be a good compromise.?
I’ll share with you one such list privately.
One note of caution: there are some important data privacy concerns here. A public list like this could be used to spam or harass researchers. Asking for researcher permission to include their name and information and a mechanism for people to opt out later seems important.
Thanks. Do you see a particular vector or case where harassment might be a risk? I’m thinking that for a list of “researchers who do work on global priorities” or “researchers who have spoken at EA global conference” this is akin to existing public lists of researchers by field and this not a big threat.
If instead this was a list reflecting, e.g., deeply personal views or political affiliations it could be more problematic.
And you are right that we should notify people who are on the list and allow them to ask to have their names removed.
There is precedence for episodes of harassment in the community [1]. One motivated and misguided individual could use this list to conduct more harassment in the future.
There is also precedence for scams directed at academics—I remember distinctly one such scam where one of my colleague’s account was spoofed and they tried to scam money out of me.
Overall I agree that this is less risky than a list of people who share a particular belief, and as risky as other public lists of scientists by field. But I think this these previous lists are also iffy and maybe should be more private.
There are some lists circulating in the community which are not public but are free to be shared privately. I think this is a good model to imitate, where people interested in accessing the database could reach out to you for access, stating their purpose in the process.
I will not enter in details
Thanks. I’ll be careful about this. In principle, there is no reason I would need to make this list public. Perhaps a ‘by-invitation Airtable’ would be a good compromise.?