People are talking about a purchase in April 2022, at which point the organization doing the purchasing really was âCEAâ. For example, youâd say âwhy did Google start a self-driving car project?â and not âwhy did Alphabet start a self-driving car project?â, since at the time they started the project the umbrella organization was still called âGoogleâ.
I also think itâs hard to get people to start using a new name for an organization: people still colloquially used âGoogleâ for âAlphabetâ for years. And that was with a big marketing push, while this transition has been much quieter and somewhat uneven:
The 2022-09-13 post announcing the change doesnât show any sort of diagram, and makes it sound like the change is from [CEA [core, 80k, GWWC, etc]] to [CEA [EV ops, core, 80k, GWWC, etc]] and not to [EVF [CEA, 80k, GWWC, âŚ]. See the confusion in the comments and âWe didnât want to make a big deal about this rebrandâ.
CEAâs footer didnât switch to EVF until 2022-10-26 (old, new).
The footer on EA Funds said it was part of CEA, not EAF, until I wrote to them to ask on 2022-11-28.
CEAâs âteamâ page still called the umbrella organization âCEAâ until 2022-11-30 (old, new).
There are still many references to âCEA UKâ on CEAâs site, even though (pretty sure) itâs no longer a thing. Ex, Owenâs page says heâs a trustee of CEA UK, but I think should instead say a trustee of EVF. [EDIT: I found ~10 places like this and wrote to EVF]
I tentatively think this is wrong, and calling it EVF is both clearer, and important in ensuring people understand what happened.
If I say âGoogle is manipulating results to benefit some groups over others,â youâd interpret that differently than if I said âGoogle maps directions is manipulating results to benefit some groups over others.â And if I said âGoogle invests heavily in AI safetyâ youâd think I meant something different than Deepmindâs safety research.
By saying âCEA bought a castle,â they are implying (or incorrectly inferring) that the organization that people donate to named CEA is the same as the one that bought the castle. Yes, the two organizations are related, but phrasing it that way seems pretty actively misleading, and disambiguating seems critical.
they are implying (or incorrectly inferring) that the organization that people donate to named CEA is the same as the one that bought the castle
The organization that people donate to is the same as the one that bought the manor house. CEA has no legal existence distinct from EVF; any distinction between the two is purely a matter of internal organization within the legal entity now called EVF (but called CEA at the time of the purchase).
(Also, Iâd be happier if people here wouldnât amplify the âcastleâ meme. Itâs not a castle.)
When the building (itâs not a castle) was bought (in early 2021), the name of the organisation that bought it was CEA. The change at some point after that to Effective Ventures. Itâs unclear how much governance-wise a separate âumbrella CEAâ existed to a âcore CEAâ at the point of the purchase, but even now, CEA does not seem to have a board separate from Effective Ventures, and itâs ultimately the same people that hare fully responsible and itâs legally the same organisation that people donated to (unclear what kind of restrictions could put on their donations at which point in time). Note that this is different from your Google/âDeepmind example, as both of these are separte legal entities (albeit owned by the same umbrella company).
That people should use âEVFâ to refer to the umbrella organization and âCEAâ to refer to the community building org when talking about things happening after the rebranding is uncontroversial, no? My comment isnât âgo ahead and keep saying CEA when you mean the umbrella orgâ but instead that (a) what phrasing to use for events before the rebranding isnât obvious and (b) because rebranding is hard itâs not surprising some people will still call the umbrella organization âCEAâ.
Your âGoogleâ examples donât feel clarifying to me because theyâre in the present tense and about things that havenât recently gone through rebranding, and so avoid both (a) and (b).
The way Owen started his comment, by explicitly talking about the two âCEAâs, is great, BTW.
I think we mostly agreeâbut I would claim that if youâre interested in clarity, calling the umbrella organization pre-renaming âCEAâ is confusing, and that if youâre not calling it EVF, you should at least disambiguate clearly.
People are talking about a purchase in April 2022, at which point the organization doing the purchasing really was âCEAâ. For example, youâd say âwhy did Google start a self-driving car project?â and not âwhy did Alphabet start a self-driving car project?â, since at the time they started the project the umbrella organization was still called âGoogleâ.
I also think itâs hard to get people to start using a new name for an organization: people still colloquially used âGoogleâ for âAlphabetâ for years. And that was with a big marketing push, while this transition has been much quieter and somewhat uneven:
The 2022-09-13 post announcing the change doesnât show any sort of diagram, and makes it sound like the change is from [CEA [core, 80k, GWWC, etc]] to [CEA [EV ops, core, 80k, GWWC, etc]] and not to [EVF [CEA, 80k, GWWC, âŚ]. See the confusion in the comments and âWe didnât want to make a big deal about this rebrandâ.
CEAâs footer didnât switch to EVF until 2022-10-26 (old, new).
The footer on EA Funds said it was part of CEA, not EAF, until I wrote to them to ask on 2022-11-28.
CEAâs âteamâ page still called the umbrella organization âCEAâ until 2022-11-30 (old, new).
There are still many references to âCEA UKâ on CEAâs site, even though (pretty sure) itâs no longer a thing. Ex, Owenâs page says heâs a trustee of CEA UK, but I think should instead say a trustee of EVF. [EDIT: I found ~10 places like this and wrote to EVF]
The US branch of EVF is still called CEA today.
The purchase was in April 2022 not in 2021; however the rest of your comment seems fair.
Thanks! Edited!
I tentatively think this is wrong, and calling it EVF is both clearer, and important in ensuring people understand what happened.
If I say âGoogle is manipulating results to benefit some groups over others,â youâd interpret that differently than if I said âGoogle maps directions is manipulating results to benefit some groups over others.â And if I said âGoogle invests heavily in AI safetyâ youâd think I meant something different than Deepmindâs safety research.
By saying âCEA bought a castle,â they are implying (or incorrectly inferring) that the organization that people donate to named CEA is the same as the one that bought the castle. Yes, the two organizations are related, but phrasing it that way seems pretty actively misleading, and disambiguating seems critical.
The organization that people donate to is the same as the one that bought the manor house. CEA has no legal existence distinct from EVF; any distinction between the two is purely a matter of internal organization within the legal entity now called EVF (but called CEA at the time of the purchase).
(Also, Iâd be happier if people here wouldnât amplify the âcastleâ meme. Itâs not a castle.)
When the building (itâs not a castle) was bought (in early 2021), the name of the organisation that bought it was CEA. The change at some point after that to Effective Ventures. Itâs unclear how much governance-wise a separate âumbrella CEAâ existed to a âcore CEAâ at the point of the purchase, but even now, CEA does not seem to have a board separate from Effective Ventures, and itâs ultimately the same people that hare fully responsible and itâs legally the same organisation that people donated to (unclear what kind of restrictions could put on their donations at which point in time). Note that this is different from your Google/âDeepmind example, as both of these are separte legal entities (albeit owned by the same umbrella company).
That people should use âEVFâ to refer to the umbrella organization and âCEAâ to refer to the community building org when talking about things happening after the rebranding is uncontroversial, no? My comment isnât âgo ahead and keep saying CEA when you mean the umbrella orgâ but instead that (a) what phrasing to use for events before the rebranding isnât obvious and (b) because rebranding is hard itâs not surprising some people will still call the umbrella organization âCEAâ.
Your âGoogleâ examples donât feel clarifying to me because theyâre in the present tense and about things that havenât recently gone through rebranding, and so avoid both (a) and (b).
The way Owen started his comment, by explicitly talking about the two âCEAâs, is great, BTW.
I think we mostly agreeâbut I would claim that if youâre interested in clarity, calling the umbrella organization pre-renaming âCEAâ is confusing, and that if youâre not calling it EVF, you should at least disambiguate clearly.