I know of at least 1 NDA of an EA org silencing someone for discussing what bad behaviour that happened at that org. Should EA orgs be in the practice of making people sign such NDAs?I suggest no.
Feels like we've had about 3 months since the FTX collapse with no kind of leadership comment. Uh that feels bad. I mean I'm all for "give cold takes" but how long are we talking.
Sam Harris takes Giving What We Can pledge for himself and for his meditation company "Waking Up"Harris references MacAksill and Ord as having been central to his thinking and talks about Effective Altruism and exstential risk. He publicly pledges 10% of his own income and 10% of the profit from Waking Up. He also will create a series of lessons on his meditation and education app around altruism and effectiveness.Harris has 1.4M twitter followers and is a famed Humanist and New Athiest. The Waking Up app has over 500k downloads on android, so I guess over 1 million overall. https://dynamic.wakingup.com/course/D8D148I like letting personal thoughts be up or downvoted, so I've put them in the comments.
This seems quite likely given EA Survey data where, amongst people who indicated they first heard of EA from a Podcast and indicated which podcast, Sam Harris' strongly dominated all other podcasts.
More speculatively, we might try to compare these numbers to people hearing about EA from other categories. For example, by any measure, the number of people in the EA Survey who first heard about EA from Sam Harris' podcast specifically is several times the number who heard about EA from Vox's Future Perfect. As a lower bound, 4x more people specifically mentioned Sam Harris in their comment than selected Future Perfect, but this is probably dramatically undercounting Harris, since not everyone who selected Podcast wrote a comment that could be identified with a specific podcast. Unfortunately, I don't know the relative audience size of Future Perfect posts vs Sam Harris' EA podcasts specifically, but that could be used to give a rough sense of how well the different audiences respond.
How are we going to deal emotionally with the first big newspaper attack against EA?
EA is pretty powerful in terms of impact and funding.
It seems only an amount of time before there is a really nasty article written about the community or a key figure.
Last year the NYT wrote a hit piece on Scott Alexander and while it was cool that he defended himself, I think he and the rationalist community overreacted and looked bad.
I would like us to avoid this.
If someone writes a hit piece about the community, Givewell, Will MacAskill etc, how are we going to avoid a kneejerk reaction that makes everything worse?
I suggest if and when this happens:
individuals largely don't respond publicly unless they are very confident they can do so in a way that leads to deescalation.
articles exist to get clicks. It's worth someone (not necessarily me or you) responding to an article in the NYT, but if, say a niche commentator goes after someone, fewer people will hear it if we let it go.
let the comms professionals deal with it. All EA orgs and big players have comms professionals. They can defend themselves.
if we must respond (we often needn't) we should adopt a stance of grace, curiosity and hu
Yeah, I think the community response to the NYT piece was counterproductive, and I've also been dismayed at how much people in the community feel the need to respond to smaller hit pieces, effectively signal boosting them, instead of just ignoring them. I generally think people shouldn't engage with public attacks unless they have training in comms (and even then, sometimes the best response is just ignoring).
You are an EA, if you want to be. Reading this forum is enough. Giving a little of your salary effectively is enough. Trying to get an impactful job is enough. If you are trying even with a fraction of your resources to make the world better and chatting with other EAs about it, you are one too.
The Scout Mindset deserved 1/10th of the marketing campaign of WWOTF. Galef is a great figurehead for rational thinking and it would have been worth it to try and make her a public figure.
Post I spent 4 hours writing on a topic I care deeply about: 30 karma
Post I spent 40 minutes writing on a topic that the community vibes with: 120 karma
I guess this is fine - iys just people being interested but it can feel weird at times.
I strongly dislike the following sentence on effectivealtruism.org:
"Rather than just doing what feels right, we use evidence and careful analysis to find the very best causes to work on."
It reads to me as arrogant, and epitomises the worst caracatures my friends do of EAs. Read it in a snarky voice (such as one might if they struggled with the movement and were looking to do research) "Rather that just doing what feels right..."
I suggest it gets changed to one of the following:
I am genuinely sure whoever wrote it meant well, so thank you for your hard work.
Are the two bullet points two alternative suggestions? If so, I prefer the first one.
EAs please post your job posting to twitterPlease post your jobs to Twitter and reply with @effective_jobs. Takes 5 minutes. and the jobs I've posted and then tweeted have got 1000s of impressions. Or just DM me on twitter (@nathanpmyoung) and I'll do it. I think it's a really cheap way of getting EAs to look at your jobs. This applies to impactful roles in and outside EA.Here is an example of some text:-tweet 1Founder's Pledge Growth Director@FoundersPledge are looking for someone to lead their efforts in growing the amount that tech entrepreneurs give to effective charities when they IPO. Salary: $135 - $150k Location: San Franciscohttps://founders-pledge.jobs.personio.de/job/378212-tweet 2, in reply@effective_jobs-end
I suggest it should be automated but that's for a different post.
If you type "#" follwed by the title of a post and press enter it will link that post.Example:Examples of Successful Selective Disclosure in the Life Sciences This is wild
I notice I am pretty skeptical of much longtermist work and the idea that we can make progress on this stuff just by thinking about it.
I think future people matter, but I will be surprised if, after x-risk reduction work, we can find 10s of billions of dollars of work that isn't busywork and shouldn't be spent attempting to learn how to get eg nations out of poverty.
Several journalists (including those we were happy to have write pieces about WWOTF) have contacted me but I think if I talk to them, even carefully, my EA friends will be upset with me. And to be honest that upsets me.
We are in the middle of a mess of our own making. We deserve scrutiny. Ugh, I feel dirty and ashamed and frustrated.
To be clear, I think it should be your own decision to talk to journalists, but I do also just think that it's just better for us to tell our own story on the EA Forum and write comments, and not give a bunch of journalists the ability to greatly distort the things we tell them in a call, with a platform and microphone that gives us no opportunity to object or correct things.
I have been almost universally appalled at the degree to which journalists straightforwardly lie in interviews, take quotes massively out of context, or make up random stuff related to what you said, and I do think it's better that if you want to help the world understand what is going on, that you write up your own thoughts in your own context, instead of giving that job to someone else.
Unbalanced karma is good actually. it means that the moderators have to do less. I like the takes of the top users more than the median user and I want them to have more but not total influence.
Appeals to fairness don't interest me - why should voting be fair?
I have more time for transparency.
A friend asked about effective places to give. He wanted to donate through his payroll in the UK. He was enthusiastic about it, but that process was not easy.
Feels like making donations easy should be a core concern of both GiveWell and EA Funds and my experience made me a little embarrassed to be honest.
EA short story competition?Has anyone ever run a competition for EA related short stories?Why would this be a good idea?* Narratives resonate with people and have been used to convey ideas for 1000s of years* It would be low cost and fun* Using voting on this forum there is the same risk of "bad posts" as for any other postHow could it work?* Stories submitted under a tag on the EA forum.* Rated by upvotes* Max 5000 words (I made this up, dispute it in the comments)* If someone wants to give a reward, then there could be a prize for the highest rated* If there is a lot of interest/quality they could be collated and even published* Since it would be measured by upvotes it seems unlikely a destructive story would be highly rated (or as likely as any other destructive post on the forum)Upvote if you think it's a good idea. If it gets more than 40 karma I'll write one.
Give Directly has a President (Rory Stewart) paid $600k, and is hiring a Managing Director. I originally thought they had several other similar roles (because I looked on the website) but I talked to them an seemingly that is not the case. Below is the tweet that tipped me off but I think it is just mistaken.
Once could still take issue with the $600k (though I don't really)
Seems in line with CEO pay for US nonprofits with >100M in budget, at least when I spot check random charities near the end of this list.I feel confused about the president/CEO distinction however.
I dislike the framing of "considerable" and "high engagement" on the EA survey.
This copied from the survey:
No engagement: I’ve heard of effective altruism, but do not engage with effective altruism content or ideas at allMild engagement: I’ve engaged with a few articles, videos, podcasts, discussions, events on effective altruism (e.g. reading Doing Good Better or spending ~5 hours on the website of 80,000 Hours)Moderate engagement: I’ve engaged with multiple articles, videos, podcasts, discussions, or events on effective altruism (e.g. subscribing to the
Nuclear risk is in the news. I hope:- if you are an expert on nuclear risk, you are shopping around for interviews and comment- if you are an EA org that talks about nuclear risk, you are going to publish at least one article on how the current crisis relates to nuclear risk or find an article that you like and share it- if you are an EA aligned journalist, you are looking to write an article on nuclear risk and concrete actions we can take to reduce it
Factional infighting[epistemic status - low, probably some element are wrong]tl;dr- communities have a range of dispute resolution mechanisms, whether voting to public conflict to some kind of civil war- some of these are much better than others- EA has disputes and resources and it seems likely that there will be a high profile conflict at some point- What mechanisms could we put in place to handle that conflict constructively and in a positive sum way?When a community grows as powerful as EA is, there can be disagreements about resource allocation.  ... (read more)
If this gets more than 20 karma, I'll write a full post on it. This is rough.
Where would we find these forecasts
To begin with I would look at those with public records:
Beyond these, one could build a community around finding forecasts of public fi... (read more)
Is there a way to sort shortform posts?
I would like to see posts give you more karma than comments (which would hit me hard). Seems like a highly upvtoed post is waaaaay more valuable than 3 upvoted comments on that post, but it's pretty often the latter gives more karma than the former.
The amount of content on the forum is pretty overwhelming at the moment and I wonder if there is a better way to sort it.
There is no EA "scene" on twitter.For good or ill, while there are posters on twitter who talk about EA, there isn't a "scene" (a space where people use loads of EA jargon and assume everyone is EA) or at least not that I've seen.This surprised me.
EA Book discount codes.
tl;dr EA books have a positive externality. The response should be to subsidise themIf EA thinks that certain books (doing good better, the precipice) have greater benefits than they seem, they could subsidise them.There could be an EA website which has amazon coupons for EA books so that you can get them more cheaply if buying for a friend, or advertise said coupon to your friends to encourage them to buy the book.
From 5 mins of research the current best way would be for a group to buys EA books and sell them at the list price... (read more)
I'll sort of publicly flag that I sort of break the karma system. Like the way I like to post comments is little and often and this is just overpowered in getting karma.eg I recently overtook Julia Wise and I've been on the forum for years less than anyone else.
I don't really know how to solve this - maybe someone should just 1 time nuke my karma? But yeah it's true.Note that I don't do this deliberately - it's just how I like to post and I think it's honestly better to split up ideas into separate comments. But boy is it good at getting karma. And soooo m... (read more)
To modify a joke I quite liked:
Having EA Forum karma tells you two things about a person:They had the potential to have had a high impact in EA-relevant waysThey chose not to.
Having EA Forum karma tells you two things about a person:
I wouldn't worry too much about the karma system. If you're worried about having undue power in the discourse, one thing I've internalized is to use the strong upvote/downvote buttons very sparingly (e.g. I only strong-upvoted one post in 2022 and I think I never strong-downvoted any post, other than obvious spam).
Question answersWhen answering questions, I recommend people put each separate point as a separate answer. The karma ranking system is useful to see what people like/don't like and having a whole load of answers together muddies the water.
EA global1) Why is EA global space constrained? Why not just have a larger venue?
I assume there is a good reason for this which I don't know.2) It's hard to invite friends to EA global. Is this deliberate?I have a close friend who finds EA quite compelling. I figured I'd invite them to EA global. They were dissuaded by the fact they had to apply and that it would cost $400.I know that's not the actual price, but they didn't know that. I reckon they might have turned up for a couple of talks. Now they probably won't apply. Is there no way that this event could be more welcoming or is that not the point?
Re 1) Is there a strong reason to believe that EA Global is constrained by physical space? My impression is that they try to optimize pretty hard to have a good crowd and for there to be a high density of high-quality connections to be formed there.Re 2) I don't think EA Global is the best way for newcomers to EA to learn about EA.
EDIT: To be clear, neither 1) nor 2) are necessarily endorsements of the choice to structure EA Global in this way, just an explanation of what I think CEA is optimizing for.EDIT 2 2021/10/11: This explanation may be wrong, see Amy Labenz's comment here.
Personal anecdote possibly relevant for 2): EA Global 2016 was my first EA event. Before going, I had lukewarm-ish feelings towards EA, due mostly to a combination of negative misconceptions and positive true-conceptions; I decided to go anyway somewhat on a whim, since it was right next to my hometown, and I noticed that Robin Hanson and Ed Boyden were speaking there (and I liked their academic work). The event was a huge positive update for me towards the movement, and I quickly became involved – and now I do direct EA work.I'm not sure that a different introduction would have led to a similar outcome. The conversations and talks at EAG are just (as a general rule) much better than at local events, and reading books or online material also doesn't strike me as naturally leading to being part of a community in the same way.It's possible my situation doesn't generalizes to others (perhaps I'm unusual in some way, or perhaps 2021 is different from 2016 in a crucial way such that the "EAG-first" strategy used to make sense but doesn't anymore), and there may be other costs with having more newcomers at EAG (eg diluting the population of people more familiar with EA concepts), but I also think it's possible my situation does generalize and that we'd be better off nudging more newcomers to come to EAG.
Thank you for bringing this up!
1) We’d like to have a larger capacity at EA Global, and we’ve been trying to increase the number of people who can attend. Unfortunately, this year it’s been particularly difficult; we had to roll over our contract with the venue from 2020 and we are unable to use the full capacity of the venue to reduce the risk from COVID. We’re really excited that we just managed to add 300 spots (increasing capacity to 800 people), and we’re hoping to have more capacity in 2022.
There will also be an opportunity for people around the world to participate in the event online. Virtual attendees will be able to enjoy live streamed content as well as networking opportunities with other virtual attendees. More details will be published on the EA Global website the week of October 11.
2) We try to have different events that are welcoming to people who are at different points in their EA engagement. For someone earlier in their exploration of EA, the EAGx conferences are going to be a better fit. From the EA Global website:
Effective altruism conferences are a good fit for anyone who is putting EA principles into action through their... (read more)
UK government will pay for organisations to hire 18-24 year olds who are currently unemployed, for 6 months. This includes minimum wage and national insurance.
I imagine many EA orgs are people constrained rather than funding constrained but it might be worth it.
And here is a data science org which will train them as well https://twitter.com/John_Sandall/status/1315702046440534017
Note: applications have to be for 30 jobs, but you can apply over a number of organisations or alongside a local authority etc.
This perception gap site would be a good form for learning and could be used in altruism. It reframes correcting biases as a fun prediction game.https://perceptiongap.us/It's a site which gets you to guess what other political groups (republicans and democrats) think about issues.Why is it good:1) It gets people thinking and predicting. They are asked a clear question about other groups and have to answer it.2) It updates views in a non-patronising way - it turns out dems and repubs are much less polarised than most people think (the stat they give i... (read more)
It is frustrating that I cannot reply to comments from the notification menu. Seems like a natural thing to be able to do.
I wish the forum had a better setting for "I wrote this post and maybe people will find it interesting but I don't want it on the front page unless they do because that feels pretenious"
I think the EA forum wiki should allow longer and more informative articles. I think that it would get 5x traffic. So I've created a market to bet.
Does EA have a clearly denoted place for exit interviews? Like if someone who was previously very involved was leaving, is there a place they could say why?
I think the wiki should be about summarising and synthesising articles on this forum. - There are lots of great articles which will be rarely reread- Many could do with more links to eachother and to other key peices- Many could be better edited, combined etc- The wiki could take all content and aim to turn it into a minimal viable form of itself
EA criticism[Epistemic Status: low, I think this is probably wrong, but I would like to debug it publicly]If I have a criticism of EA along Institutional Decision Making lines, it is this:For a movement that wants to change how decisions get made, we should make those changes in our own organisations first.Examples of good progress:- prizes - EA orgs have offered prizes for innovation- voting systems - it's good that the forum is run on upvotes and that often I think EA uses the right tool for the job in terms of votingThings I would like to see more... (read more)
EA twitter bots
A set of EA jobs twitter bots which each retweet a specific set of hashtags eg #AISafety #EAJob, #AnimalSuffering #EAJob, etc etc. Please don't get hung up on these, we'd actually need to brainstorm the right hashtags.
You follow the bots and hear about the jobs.
Rather than using Facebook as a way to collect EA jobs we should use an airtable form1) Individuals finding jobs could put all the details in, saving time for whoever would have to do this process at 80k time.2) Airtable can post directly to facebook, so everyone would still see it https://community.airtable.com/t/posting-to-social-media-automatically/209873) Some people would find it quicker. Personally, I'd prefer an airtable form to inputting it to facebook manually every time. Ideally we should find websites which often publish useful jobs and then scrape them regularly.
Does anyone know people working on reforming the academic publishing process?
Coronavirus has caused journalists to look for scientific sources. There are no journal articles because of the lag time. So they have gone to preprint servers like bioRxiv (pronounced bio-archive). These servers are not peer reviewed so some articles are of low quality. So people have gone to twitter asking for experts to review the papers.
This is effectively a new academic publishing paradigm. If there were support fo... (read more)
If I find this forum exhausting to post on some times I can only imagine how many people bounce off entirely.
The forum has a wiki (like wikipedia)
The "Criticism of EA Community" wiki post is here.
I think it would be better as a summary of criticisms rather than links to documents containing criticisms.
This is a departure from the current wiki style, so after talking to moderators we agreed to draft externally.
Upvote this post if you think the "Criticism of EA Community" post will be better as a collaboratively-written summary. Downvote if you ... (read more)
With better wiki features and a way to come to consensus on numbers I reckon this forum can write a career guide good enough to challenge 80k. They do great work, but we are many.
There were too few parties on the last night of EA global in london which led to overcrowding, stressed party hosts and wasting a load of people's time.I suggest in future that there should be at least n/200 parties where n is the number of people attending the conference.
I don't think CEA should legislate parties, but I would like to surface in people's minds that if there are fewer than n/200 parties, then you should call up your friend with most amenable housemates and tell them to organise!
Has rethink priorities ever thought of doing a survey of non-EAs? Perhaps paying for a poll? I'd be interested in questions like "What do you think of Effective Altruism? What do you think of Effective Altruists?"Only asking questions of those who are currently here is survivorship bias. Likewise we could try and find people who left and ask why.
We are definitely planning on doing this kind of research, likely sometime in 2021.
I did a podcast where we talked about EA, would be great to hear your criticisms of it. https://pca.st/i0rovrat
Should I do more podcasts?
Any time that you read a wiki page that is sparse or has mistakes, consider adding what you were trying to find. I reckon in a few months we could make the wiki really good to use.
I sense that conquest's law is true -> that organisations that are not specifically right wing move to the left.I'm not concerned about moving to the left tbh but I am concerned with moving away from truth, so it feels like it would be good to constantly pull back towards saying true things.
I think the forum should have a retweet function but for the equivalent of github forks. So you can make changes to someone's post and offer them the ability to incorporate them. If they don't, you can just remake the article with the changes and an acknolwedgement that you did.I don't think people would actually do that that often, because they'd get no karma most of the time, but it would give karma, attribution trail for:- summaries- significant corrections/reframings- and the author could still accept the edits later
My very quick improving institutional decision-making (IIDM) thoughtsEpistemic status: Weak 55% confidence. I may delete. Feel free to call me out or DM me etc etc. I am saying these so that someone has said them. I would like them to be better phrased but then I'd probably never share them. Please feel free to criticise them though I might modify them a lot and I'm sorry if they are blunt:
Do we prefer
I am gonna do a set of polls and get a load of karma for it (70% >750). I'm currently ~20th overall on the forum despite writing few posts of note. I think polls I write create a lot of value and I like the way it incentivises me to think about questions the community wants to answer.I am pretty happy with the current karma payment but I'm not sure everyone will be so I thought I'd surface it. I've considered saying that polls delivery half the karma, but that feels kind of messy and I do think polls are currently underrated on the forum.Any ideas... (read more)
EA podcasts and videosEach EA org should pay $10 bounty to the best twitter thread talking about any episode. If you could generate 100 quality twitter threads on 80,000 hours episodes that for $1000 that would be really cheap. People would quote tweet and discuss and it would make the whole set of knowledge much more legible.
I edited the of wikipedia on Doing Good Better to try and make it more reflective of the book and Will's current views. Let me know how you think I did.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_MacAskill&editintro=Template%3ABLP_editintro#Doing_Good_Better
Plant-based meat. Fun video from a youtuber which makes a strong case. Very sharable. https://youtu.be/-k-V3ESHcfA
Why do some shortforms have agree voting and others don't?
I notice that sometimes I want to post on something that's on both the EA forum and lesswrong. And ideally, clicking "see lesswrong comments" would just show them on the current forum page and if I responded, it would calculate EA forum karma for the forum and LessWrong karma for lessWrong.Probably not worth building, but still.
Someone being recommended to learn about EA by listening to 10 hours of podcasts in the wild
Maximise useful feedback, minimise rudenessWhen someone says of your organisation "I want you to do X" do not say "You are wrong to want X"This rudely discourages them from giving you feedback in future. Instead, there are a number of options:
None of these opti... (read more)
Other than my karma, this post got negative karma. Why?I understand that sometimes I post controversial stuff, but this one is just straightforwardly valuable. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/GshpbrBaCQjxmAKJG/cause-prioritsation-contest-who-bettors-think-will-win
I sense new stuff on the forum is probably overrated. Surely we should assume that most of the most valuable things for most people to read have already been written?
Have you seen the new features google docs has added recently?
Feels like they are gunning for Notion.
The difference between the criticism contest and openphil's cause prioritisation contest is pretty interesting. 60% I'm gonna think OpenPhil's created more value in terms of changes in a 10 years time.
1 minute video summaries of my EA Criticism contest articles:Summaries are underrated - https://www.loom.com/share/4781668372694c83a4e9feffe249469b - full text
Improving Karma - https://www.loom.com/share/6d0decef2bd14efc9b22e14d43693002 - full text
Common misconception I see:Longtermists causes are not:
Longtermist causes are:
How much value is there in combining two EA slacks which discuss the same topic?Probably $1,000s right? Or maybe we should assume it will be a natural process that one will subsume the other?
Effective altruism and politicsHere is an app that lets you vote on other people's comments (I'd like to see it installed in the forum so there is a lower barrier to entry) You can add thoughts and try and make arguments that get broad agreement. What are the different parties of opinion on EA and politics.https://pol.is/283be3mcmj
EA WikiI've decided I'm going to just edit the wiki to be like the wiki I want.Currently the wiki feels meticulously referenced but lacking in detail. I'd much prefer it to have more synthesised content which is occasionally just someone's opinion. If you dislike this approach, let me know.
Why do posts get more upvotes than questions with the same info?I wrote this question: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ckcoSe3CS2n3BW3aT/what-ea-projects-could-grow-to-become-megaprojectsSome others wrote this post summarising it:https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/faezoENQwSTyw9iop/ea-megaprojects-continuedWhy do you think the summary got more upvotes. I'm not upset, I like a summary too, but in my mind, a question that anyone can submit answers to or upvote current answers is much more useful. So I am confused. Can any suggest why?
At what size of the EA movement should there be an independent EA whistleblowing organisation, which investigates allegations of corruption?
Some thoughts- Utilitiarianism but being cautious around the weird/unilateral stuff is still good- We shouldn't be surprised that we didn't figure out SBF was fraudulent quicker than billions of dollars of cryto money... and Michael Lewis- Scandal prediction markets are the solution here and one day they will be normal. But not today. Don't boo me, I'm right- Everyone wants whistleblowing, no one wants the correctly incentivised decentralised form of whistleblowing.- Gotta say, I feel for many random individual people who knew or interacted closely with SB... (read more)
I strongly dislike the "further reading" sections of the forum wiki/forum tags. They imply that the right way to know more about things is to read a load of articles. It seems clear to me that instead we should sythesise these points and then link them where relevant. Then if you wanted more context you could read the links.
The 'Further reading' sections are a time-cheap way of helping readers learn more about a topic, given our limited capacity to write extended entries on those topics.
Clubhouse Invite Thread1) Clubhouse is a new social media platform, but you need an invite to join2) It allows chat in rooms, and networking3) Seems some people could deliver sooner value by having a clubhouse invite4) People who are on clubhouse have invites to give5) If you think an invite would be valuable or heck you'd just like one, comment below and then if anyone has invites to give they can see EAs who want them.6) I have some invites to give away.
Fun UK innovative policy competition:
Will probably be worth signing up to if that's your area of interest.
Please comment any other places people could find mailing lists or good content for EA related areas.
I think in SBF we farmed out our consciences. Like people who say "there need to be atrocities in war so that people who live in peace" we thought "SBF can do trade dodgy coins stuff so that we can help, but let's not think about it". I don't think we could have known about the fraud, but I do think there were plenty of warning signs we ignored as "SBF is the man in the arena". No, either we should have been cogent and open about what he was doing or we should have said we didn't like it and begun pulling away reputationally.