I really like that Ben made an explicit prediction related to the Giving Green grant, and solicited community predictions too! I currently think grantmakers (at least the EA Fund fund managers) should do this sort of thing more (as discussed here and here), so itās nice to see a first foray into that.
That said, it seems both hard to predict on the question as stated and hard to draw useful inferences from it, since no indication is given of how many experts will be asked. The number Iād give, and what the numbers signify, would be very different if you expect to ask 3 experts vs expecting to ask 20, for example. Do you have a sense of roughly what that denominator will be?
Thanks. I now realise that I have another confusion about the question: Are experts saying whether they found the research high quality and convincing in whatever conclusions it has, or saying whether the researcher strongly updated the experts specifically towards viewing grassroots activism more positively?
This is relevant if the researcher might form more mixed or negative conclusions about grassroots activism, yet still do so in a high-quality and convincing way.
Iām gonna guess Ben either means āwhether the researcher strongly updated the experts specifically towards viewing grassroots activism more positivelyā or he just assumes that a researcher Giving Green hires and manages is very likely to conclude that grassroots activism is quite impactful (such that the different interpretations of the question are the same in practice). (My forecast is premised on that.)
I really like that Ben made an explicit prediction related to the Giving Green grant, and solicited community predictions too! I currently think grantmakers (at least the EA Fund fund managers) should do this sort of thing more (as discussed here and here), so itās nice to see a first foray into that.
That said, it seems both hard to predict on the question as stated and hard to draw useful inferences from it, since no indication is given of how many experts will be asked. The number Iād give, and what the numbers signify, would be very different if you expect to ask 3 experts vs expecting to ask 20, for example. Do you have a sense of roughly what that denominator will be?
My guess is 1-3 experts.
Thanks. I now realise that I have another confusion about the question: Are experts saying whether they found the research high quality and convincing in whatever conclusions it has, or saying whether the researcher strongly updated the experts specifically towards viewing grassroots activism more positively?
This is relevant if the researcher might form more mixed or negative conclusions about grassroots activism, yet still do so in a high-quality and convincing way.
Iām gonna guess Ben either means āwhether the researcher strongly updated the experts specifically towards viewing grassroots activism more positivelyā or he just assumes that a researcher Giving Green hires and manages is very likely to conclude that grassroots activism is quite impactful (such that the different interpretations of the question are the same in practice). (My forecast is premised on that.)
This.