So, if you want to apply for a grant, should you look at what projects who usually get fundings from the effective altruists look like, or would this be taken as gaming the system. Are you encouraging submissions that don't look like other submissions ?
Bit confused about launching this new Lightcone spinoff (which to be clear sounds like a Good Thing) when Lightcone Infrastructure itself seems perennially in danger of going bankrupt? At least, that was the scuttlebutt during their last 2-3 annual donation drives. If the funding coordinator can't fundraise for its own survival, that seems bad for ecosystem continuity purposes, and also a sign of Philanthropy Skill Issue?
I'd like to see something a bit simpler that would be more useful to small donors: an essay-writing contest where people argue in favor of donating to their favorite charity. This would be like a book review contest, but a bit more action-oriented. It should still be a writing contest, with entries judged by how good the writing is rather than attempting to decide whether they're really more effective. But perhaps it could feed into more rigorous evaluations?
So, if you want to apply for a grant, should you look at what projects who usually get fundings from the effective altruists look like, or would this be taken as gaming the system. Are you encouraging submissions that don't look like other submissions ?
Bit confused about launching this new Lightcone spinoff (which to be clear sounds like a Good Thing) when Lightcone Infrastructure itself seems perennially in danger of going bankrupt? At least, that was the scuttlebutt during their last 2-3 annual donation drives. If the funding coordinator can't fundraise for its own survival, that seems bad for ecosystem continuity purposes, and also a sign of Philanthropy Skill Issue?
I'd like to see something a bit simpler that would be more useful to small donors: an essay-writing contest where people argue in favor of donating to their favorite charity. This would be like a book review contest, but a bit more action-oriented. It should still be a writing contest, with entries judged by how good the writing is rather than attempting to decide whether they're really more effective. But perhaps it could feed into more rigorous evaluations?
Very funny typo
> SFF does an unusually job of having everyone coordinate around not gaming the system,