Personally, I remember telling at least a handful of people at the time that Sam belonged in a jail cell, but I expect that people thought I was being hyperbolic (which was entirely fair, I was traumatised and was probably communicating in a way that signalled unreliability).
I was told that conversations were had with people in leadership roles in EA. I wasn’t part of those conversations and don’t know the full details of what was discussed or with whom.
It would be awesome for the names of senior people who knew to be made public, plus the exact nature of what they were told and their response or lack thereof.
I think this could be a nice-to-have, but really, I think it’s too much to ask, ”For every senior EA, we want a long list of exactly each thing they knew about SBF”
This would probably be a massive pain, and much of the key information will be confidential (for example, informants who want to remain anonymous).
My guess is that there were a bunch of flags that were more apparent than nbouscal’s stories.
I do think we should have really useful summaries of the key results. If there were a few people who were complicit or highly negligent, then that should be reported, and appropriate actions taken.
I strongly believe it is hyperrelevant to know who knew what, when so that these people are held to account. I don’t think this is too much to ask, nor does it have to be arduous in the way you described of getting every name with max fidelity. I see so many claims that “key EA members knew what was going on” and never any sort of name associate with it.
I agree this is really important and would really, really want it to be figured out, and key actions taken. I think I’m less focused on all of the information of such a discovery being public, as opposed to much of it being summarized a bit.
I don’t feel like I’m in a good place to give a good answer. First, I haven’t really thought about it nor am I an expert in these sorts of matters.
Second, I’m like several layers deep in funding structures that start with these people. It’s sort of like asking me to publicly write what I love/hate, objectively, about my boss.
I think I could say that I’d expect appropriate actions to look a lot like they do with top companies (mainly ones without lots of known management integrity problems). At these companies, I believe that when some officials are investigated for potential issues, often they’re given no punishment, and sometimes they’re fired. It really depends on the details of the findings.
Personally, I remember telling at least a handful of people at the time that Sam belonged in a jail cell, but I expect that people thought I was being hyperbolic (which was entirely fair, I was traumatised and was probably communicating in a way that signalled unreliability).
I was told that conversations were had with people in leadership roles in EA. I wasn’t part of those conversations and don’t know the full details of what was discussed or with whom.
It would be awesome for the names of senior people who knew to be made public, plus the exact nature of what they were told and their response or lack thereof.
I think this could be a nice-to-have, but really, I think it’s too much to ask,
”For every senior EA, we want a long list of exactly each thing they knew about SBF”
This would probably be a massive pain, and much of the key information will be confidential (for example, informants who want to remain anonymous).
My guess is that there were a bunch of flags that were more apparent than nbouscal’s stories.
I do think we should have really useful summaries of the key results. If there were a few people who were complicit or highly negligent, then that should be reported, and appropriate actions taken.
I strongly believe it is hyperrelevant to know who knew what, when so that these people are held to account. I don’t think this is too much to ask, nor does it have to be arduous in the way you described of getting every name with max fidelity. I see so many claims that “key EA members knew what was going on” and never any sort of name associate with it.
I agree this is really important and would really, really want it to be figured out, and key actions taken. I think I’m less focused on all of the information of such a discovery being public, as opposed to much of it being summarized a bit.
A summary of sorts is being compiled here:
What would you suggest might be appropriate actions for complicity or negligence?
I don’t feel like I’m in a good place to give a good answer. First, I haven’t really thought about it nor am I an expert in these sorts of matters.
Second, I’m like several layers deep in funding structures that start with these people. It’s sort of like asking me to publicly write what I love/hate, objectively, about my boss.
I think I could say that I’d expect appropriate actions to look a lot like they do with top companies (mainly ones without lots of known management integrity problems). At these companies, I believe that when some officials are investigated for potential issues, often they’re given no punishment, and sometimes they’re fired. It really depends on the details of the findings.