Toby Tremlett🔹

Karma: 5,751

Hello! I’m Toby. I’m Content Strategist at CEA. I work with the Online Team to make sure the Forum is a great place to discuss doing the most good we can. You’ll see me posting a lot, authoring the EA Newsletter and curating Forum Digests, making moderator comments and decisions, and more.

Before working at CEA, I studied Philosophy at the University of Warwick, and worked for a couple of years on a range of writing and editing projects within the EA space. Recently I helped run the Amplify Creative Grants program, to encourage more impactful podcasting and YouTube projects. You can find a bit of my own creative output on my blog, and my podcast feed.

Toby Tremlett🔹Jun 3, 2025, 1:01 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: questionhaver8733’s comment on: Donating to make an individual impact
It depends on what you mean by ‘know’. Everything is probabilistic, so you can rely on analyses which say that your donation is expected to avert X deaths, but in reality, it will almost certainly be more or less than X.

Also, you can do a lot with $1000.
I think a more specific question might be helpful. Are you looking for the best way to donate to help the most lives, or the most certain donation, even if it leads to a smaller expected impact?

Toby Tremlett🔹Jun 2, 2025, 11:05 AM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Deco 🔹’s comment on: Deco ’s Quick takes
Out of that list I’d guess that the fourth and fifth (depending on topics) bullets are most suitable for the Forum.

The basic way I’d differentiate content is that the Forum frontpage should all be content that is related to the project of effective altruism, the community section is about EA as a community (i.e. if you were into AI Safety but not EA, you wouldn’t be interested in the community section), and “personal blog” (i.e. not visible on frontpage) is the section for everything that isn’t in those categories. For example posts on “Miscellaneous topics such as productivity and ADD” would probably be moved to personal blog, unless they were strongly related to EA. This doesn’t mean the content isn’t good—lots of EAs read productivity content, but ideally, the Forum should be focused on EA priorities rather than what EAs find interesting.

Feel free to message me with specific ideas that I could help categorise for you! And if in doubt, quick-takes are much more loose and you can post stuff like the bi-weekly updates there to gauge interest.

Toby Tremlett🔹Jun 2, 2025, 8:00 AM
4 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: NickLaing’s comment on: EAG London ’25 Coordination Thread
You should be able to see all of them in the “my event” section.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 30, 2025, 2:08 PM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Deco 🔹’s comment on: Deco ’s Quick takes
I love the model—and I’m happy to give feedback on ideas for EA Forum posts if that would ever be helpful! (I’m the Content Strategist for the Forum).

Toby Tremlett🔹May 30, 2025, 10:59 AM
6 points
0 ∶ 0
on: EAG London ’25 Coordination Thread
At this EAG I’m hoping to talk to some great Forum authors who I haven’t met in person yet, but also to identify people who could get (and generate) a lot of value from writing on the Forum, but haven’t tried it.

You can help me (and the Forum) by recommending:
- People who are coming to EAG with expertise and writing ability, but no Forum presence.
- People who’ve been in the EA bubble for a while, and want to do a better job of sharing their work.
Here’s my swapcard. (NB- edited link, to get the link to your profile, look yourself up in the attendees tab)

EAG London ’25 Coordination Thread

Toby Tremlett🔹May 30, 2025, 10:50 AM

18 points

13 comments1 min readEA link

Toby Tremlett🔹May 29, 2025, 1:29 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Kazik’s comment on: Open thread: April—June 2025
Hey Kazik!
Thanks for joining. If you want any hints or tips about the Forum—or want to find people doing similar work, let me know.
Cheers
Toby, from the Forum team.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 29, 2025, 1:27 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Dima Bogdanov (undimmable)’s comment on: Open thread: April—June 2025
Hey Dima!
Thanks for joining the Forum! Let me know if you want any tips, feedback on posts, etc…
Toby, from the Forum team.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 29, 2025, 1:26 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: FionnaTadiwa’s comment on: Open thread: April—June 2025
Hey Tadiwa—
Hope you’re getting something valuable out of the EA Forum. If you want some recommendations of where to look for great content—let me know,
Toby—from the Forum team.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 29, 2025, 1:25 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: TamisOnAPath’s comment on: Open thread: April—June 2025
That’s so cool Tami!
I hope you find some valuable ideas on the EA Forum.
Message me or reply to the comment if you’d like to know where to look. To start, I’d recommend the best of page and the EA Handbook.
For 7-8 year olds, there are some very cool EA-related videos on the rational animations, TED-Ed and kurtzegesagt youtube channels. Let me know if you want recommendations :)
Toby—from the Forum team.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 29, 2025, 1:21 PM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Karl Mechkin’s comment on: Open thread: April—June 2025
Hey Karl,
Thanks for joining the Forum! Message me or reply to the comment if you have any questions about the Forum!
Toby—from the Forum team.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 29, 2025, 1:18 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Benton 🔹’s comment on: Open thread: April—June 2025
Hey Benton! Great to have you here. Message me or reply to the comment if you have any questions about the Forum!
Toby—from the Forum team.

All Forum events (I’ve been involved in) retrospective

Toby Tremlett🔹May 28, 2025, 1:59 PM

17 points

1 comment8 min readEA link

Toby Tremlett🔹May 27, 2025, 11:10 AM
4 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: James Herbert’s comment on: State of the EA Newsletter
Interesting! It doesn’t give a %, just shows this:
Based on your comment, this seems less unlikely. But the “these locations look accurate to me” thing at the bottom suggests mailchimp isn’t very confident here.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 22, 2025, 11:10 AM
12 points
0 ∶ 0
on: State of the EA Newsletter
Here is the very sketchy first salvo at measuring “Impact-weighted clicks” (not sure how much I endorse this anymore, but feel free to treat me as if I do endorse it in responses to the comment—that’ll help me figure out what I think).

Was going to just share a doc with @Vasco Grilo🔸 but I figured there is no reason not to make it public. Very happy to get input on this as well, especially if you have experience trying to measure the value of content (outside of just “clicks on jobs”)
Impact-weighted clicks
Not all EA Newsletter clicks are created equal. The EA Newsletter contains links to impactful jobs, but also interesting podcasts, videos, and articles — where the only further call to action is subscribing. This content isn’t of no value, but it’s very unlikely to be the source of most of the newsletter’s value.
The metric I’m making will give categories of clicks a value from 0-1, and then produce a total number of “impact-weighted” clicks, where the total amount of unique clicks each category is multiplied by the value assigned to that category.
What is the value of content clicks?
Firstly — retention. Without content (hypothesis 1), people wouldn’t be interested in the EA Newsletter.
Secondly — content pipelines. If someone starts reading an EA friendly outlet, subscribes to the 80k podcast, buys a book, subscribes to rational animations, etc… They increase their chance of coming across EA content in the future.
Third — Changing minds. People who are aware of big problems might decide to work on them.
How should we categorise EANL clicks?
Category % of clicks for the march newsletter
Content 69%
Job ad (and job boards) 23%
Fellowship/ funding 7%
Courses 1%
Donation opportunities 0% (none included)
What value should we give to each type of click?
An obvious ranking is:
1. Job ads (this person is already engaged and ready to act)
2. Fellowship/ funding (likewise ready to act, but funding is short term and fellowship is the step before the impactful job)
3. Courses (intent to get more involved, learn more, but step before deeper engagement)
4. Donation (signals strong interest, and likely to sign them up to marketing from an effective charity)
5. Content (value described above, pretty loosely valuable)
I would stand by the obvious ranking (though maybe more quibling should separate “fellowship/ funding”). However, we also need to provide values for each step. In the ideal world, we could base this on the drop off rate between each step in our funnel (perhaps X% of people who do a fellowship don’t end up getting a relevant job, therefore fellowship clicks should be ranked as the value of job ads—X). We should come back to this, but for now, I’ll do some crude estimates.
- Job ad clicks = 1
- Let’s say 50% of fellowship graduates , or funding recipients get a relevant job. Fellowship = 0.5
- 25% of courses graduates do something relevant afterwards = 0.25
- Donation = 0.05
- Content = 0
Category Value per click
Content 0
Job ad (and job boards) 1
Fellowship/ funding 0.5
Courses 0.25
Donation opportunities 0.05
How could the metric be better?
- If we knew more about our audience, we could multiply the impact-weighted total clicks by the “value” of our current email-opening audience (i.e. each click is more valuable in expectation if the audience is highly motivated, educated, etc…). Hopefully if we get a marketer involved we could learn more about this.
Hypotheses to test:
H1: “Without content, people wouldn’t be interested in reading the EA Newsletter”. I.e. without content, overall clicks go down.
- This might be wrong—the content doesn’t seem to have led to more subscribers.
- And yet—people come back to click every month.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 22, 2025, 10:33 AM
4 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Toby Tremlett🔹’s comment on: State of the EA Newsletter
Also also—this isn’t included in the post but 70% of clicks on the newsletter go towards content links, i.e. articles, podcasts, videos etc… which are great resources on something EAs care about, but don’t have clear CTAs. I’m not sure how to measure the value of this yet—but in surveys, many of the responses show people changing their minds/ plans because of content they read in the newsletter. Seems likely this is a very important part of the newsletter’s impact, but currently it counts for 0 in my impact-weighted-clicks metric.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 22, 2025, 10:27 AM
10 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Vasco Grilo🔸’s comment on: State of the EA Newsletter
“I would ask current subscribers how much they would be willing to pay in order to maintain their subscription.”

That’s interesting! I could definitely give that a go. I think that might be a bit off though because the more relevant thing is how much money I have access to in our budget/ could access by making the right case to OP (and what it would be spent on otherwise). I’ve also never really understood how individual willingness to pay is a good signal when people have wildly different resources available to them. Could be a useful benchmark.
Another point on that—I don’t trust myself when it comes to valuing things monetarily. I’d never pay for social media or a newsletter, because it just isn’t something I’m used to (I’m used to them being free), but if I actually calculate the time I’m spending on social media/ newsletters I count as a valuable use of time, and use something like this to calculate the value of my time, I get surprisingly high figure.
Fair point on click-rates!
“How does your 0.167 impact-weighted-click/$ (= ¹⁄₆) compare with the clicks per $ regarding 80 k’s, Animal Advocacy Career’s, and Probably Good’s job boards?”
This is a good question—I should prioritise comparing these. I do expect that some of those programs (and possibly the EA opportunities board) are cheaper per click, and have a higher intent audience. The EA Newsletter hasn’t been optimised for job clicks (and probably shouldn’t be). I’ve been a bit bottlenecked by what I can most easily measure.

Toby Tremlett🔹May 22, 2025, 10:17 AM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Toby Tremlett🔹’s comment on: Request for Feedback: Scaling TaRL through Student-Teacher Placements in Nigeria
Awesome—thanks!

Toby Tremlett🔹May 22, 2025, 8:05 AM
6 points
4 ∶ 0
on: Request for Feedback: Scaling TaRL through Student-Teacher Placements in Nigeria
Hey! I think you’d get more of the right people engaging with this if you shared a bit more detail (people are very unlikely to click on a link without knowing what to expect).
I.e. - share that you are in Nigeria, you’re talking about TaRL, include the 70% of kids fact (that was great), and then outline your proposed intervention, and how the reader can help.
The title is also a little too vague- maybe title based on a more specific ask?

Toby Tremlett🔹 21 May 2025 12:25 UTC
2 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Introducing EA in a non-EA nonprofit
@Gemma 🔸 I think you mentioned doing something like this? Or was it for the GWWC pledge in particular?

Category	% of clicks for the march newsletter
Content	69%
Job ad (and job boards)	23%
Fellowship/ funding	7%
Courses	1%
Donation opportunities	0% (none included)

Category	Value per click
Content	0
Job ad (and job boards)	1
Fellowship/ funding	0.5
Courses	0.25
Donation opportunities	0.05

Toby Tremlett🔹

EAG Lon­don ’25 Co­or­di­na­tion Thread

All Fo­rum events (I’ve been in­volved in) retrospective

Impact-weighted clicks

What is the value of content clicks?

How should we categorise EANL clicks?

What value should we give to each type of click?

How could the metric be better?

Hypotheses to test:

EAG London ’25 Coordination Thread

All Forum events (I’ve been involved in) retrospective