Hide table of contents

EA London Strategy Quarterly


Taking the model from the quarterly reports that Peter makes I thought I would add the London EA strategy quarterlies into the mix in case anyone has some good ideas to add, constructive criticism (also open to unconstructive criticism if it makes you feel better)  or wants a framework for doing their own.

 

In the first strategy meeting we created teams to focus on each project assigning one person as team leader and then they would organise project meetings, tasks for individuals and goals for that specific project. I aim to inventory the projects and goals, explain how they’ve been accomplished or fallen short throughout Q1, and then set out projects/goals for Q2. There was also discussion about the EA London vision, mission and values but that would probably suit a separate post if anyone was interested.


This review covers the time period of 25 April 2015 through 18 July 2015. I have not added any additional information about things that have happened since the last meeting. The next strategy meeting should be happening at the end of October.



University Outreach


Q1 Goal

Organise setting up of EA societies at several London universities.


Progress

We have someone researching how to set up an official society and contacting people willing to set one up, as well as how to advertise events through university channels. We messaged people on the EA London Facebook group who are currently studying in London and 11 out of the 13 contacted said they were willing to help in some capacity, ranging from telling friends about it to actively setting up a society. We have people willing to set up chapters at UCL, LSE, Kings, Imperial, Regents and LSHTM.


What Went Right

There are four universities with very active EA London members that are setting societies up, applying for official status and arranging talks for students.

.

What Went Wrong

We missed out on most applications for freshers fair which is probably one of the best way to raise awareness amongst people joining university. There are quite a few universities that haven’t been contacted yet and we haven’t found the key one or two passionate people to start the process at most places.


Q2 Goals

To continue finding students at universities in London who want to set up societies and to introduce these leads to people who have already started this process to pass on advice.

To create official societies that can be given free marketing and a free stall at freshers fair by the universities for next year. To normalise the idea of having an EA society at a London University.


Workplace Marketing


Q1 Goals

The team should meet to set goals (outside of the main strategy meeting) with ideas of goals being outreach to colleagues and workplace giving schemes.


Progress

This team didn’t meet before the second strategy meeting so no progress was made.


What Went Wrong

The lead person ended up not having the time to lead this project. We should make sure going forward that project leads have the time to organise and maybe have a monthly check up with each of the leaders to see how things are progressing so that we can switch earlier. We should also log which projects do make progress and which don’t so that we can see what the differences are and what ways we can improve.


Q2 Goals

We had the idea of giving more talks in London in places like coding bootcamps. We decided to merge this project with workplace marketing with someone who had more time to organise. The new goal is for this group to meet and arrange talks at workplaces or other venues in London and find people who would like to give talks about effective altruism.


Events


Q1 Goals

To have more people help organise the monthly social meetings, to hold the Peter Singer talk on 8th and 11th of June, to potentially have a casino night.


Progress

The Peter Singer talks filled capacity and led to more interest on Meetup and Facebook, there is a pub social arranged monthly and there have been summer picnics as well. I didn’t hear anything about the casino events discussed in this meeting.


What Went Right

There are more events and more people attending each month as well as slightly more varied events. Looking at Meetup, between the 25th of April and 18th of July we went from 271 members to 423 and from 102 active members to 116. On Facebook we went from 239 members to 351.


What Went Wrong

Event organising has tended to end up with the same person each time and it would be better if this could be spread out between more people. Events were mainly pub based and happen after work in Central London and could drive away people who don’t want to go to a dingy pub on a weeknight in Holborn.


Q2 Goal

Have more people organising events, have events for different careers and at different venues. Have people give talks at London based TEDx events. Have a venue for London based people involved with .impact workathons.  

 


Fundraising Group


Q1 Goal

To discuss potential fundraising for EA London


Progress

Have been talking to EA Ventures, they want a more specific plan before funding.


Q2 Goal

Two approaches

  • Running a marketing campaign to get more interest, then increasing capacity to handle additional people being interested. EA Ventures not interested in this yet.

  • Overall coordinator for London. EA Ventures is potentially interested in funding this.

 


Career Specific Subgroups of EA London


Q1 Goals

Organise a meeting to discuss creating Facebook groups for different career and arranging meetings/networking. Sectors could include finance/banking, charity and tech (from the careers of people who showed interest in this project)


Progress

A finance group has been set up on Facebook and a meeting has been held for EA programmers.


Q2 Goals

This is similar to the workplace marketing project and so will probably be merged with that, with more career specific groups and events being set up.



Contacting new people who are interested


Q1 Goals

We need to respond to people that show interest in effective altruism in London.


Progress

We have a spreadsheet to show when someone has contacted EA London Meetup and who is responsible for replying and arranging a meeting.


What Went Right

There were four people who contacted EA London and there were responses on the same day, three of which then went on to a meeting and people getting more involved in EA and volunteering their time to work on projects.


What Went Wrong

We didn’t respond to people signing up on the Giving What We Can London mailing list and we don’t have any proactive outreach for people mentioning Effective Altruism on social media.


Q2 Goals

Include the GWWC mailing list which has more people signing up than messages on Meetup. Have one person responsible for replying, and if they can’t meet they should find someone who is available. Look into ways of finding people expressing interest on social media. Look into making a website for EA London.

 


New Project

Measuring EA London’s impact


Q2 Goals

Find out how to monitor and evaluate the impact EA London is having, seeing if people are deciding to give more and give more effectively, changing careers and letting other people know about EA London as well as how much they do or don’t enjoy the atmosphere and people.

 

 

 

Let us know if there are any ideas you think we should try and anything we could do better to reach more people.

 

Comments2


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Awesome to see this quarterly report and it's great to see what EA London is up to. I hope this sort of quarterly report continues and I hope some other people pursuing EA projects pick up the format. :) Kudos!

My only nitpick is that Apr-May-Jun is typically considered Q2, not Q1 -- Q1 is typically Jan-Feb-Mar. So I was confused at first. But then I figured it out!

Thanks, my plan was to keep on going with the quarters past Q5 rather than rotate through Q1-Q4 each year, but maybe if most people understand it as a yearly thing I should change it.

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
When we built a calculator to help meat-eaters offset the animal welfare impact of their diet through donations (like carbon offsets), we didn't expect it to become one of our most effective tools for engaging new donors. In this post we explain how it works, why it seems particularly promising for increasing support for farmed animal charities, and what you can do to support this work if you think it’s worthwhile. In the comments I’ll also share our answers to some frequently asked questions and concerns some people have when thinking about the idea of an ‘animal welfare offset’. Background FarmKind is a donation platform whose mission is to support the animal movement by raising funds from the general public for some of the most effective charities working to fix factory farming. When we built our platform, we directionally estimated how much a donation to each of our recommended charities helps animals, to show users.  This also made it possible for us to calculate how much someone would need to donate to do as much good for farmed animals as their diet harms them – like carbon offsetting, but for animal welfare. So we built it. What we didn’t expect was how much something we built as a side project would capture peoples’ imaginations!  What it is and what it isn’t What it is:  * An engaging tool for bringing to life the idea that there are still ways to help farmed animals even if you’re unable/unwilling to go vegetarian/vegan. * A way to help people get a rough sense of how much they might want to give to do an amount of good that’s commensurate with the harm to farmed animals caused by their diet What it isn’t:  * A perfectly accurate crystal ball to determine how much a given individual would need to donate to exactly offset their diet. See the caveats here to understand why you shouldn’t take this (or any other charity impact estimate) literally. All models are wrong but some are useful. * A flashy piece of software (yet!). It was built as
Garrison
 ·  · 7m read
 · 
This is the full text of a post from "The Obsolete Newsletter," a Substack that I write about the intersection of capitalism, geopolitics, and artificial intelligence. I’m a freelance journalist and the author of a forthcoming book called Obsolete: Power, Profit, and the Race to build Machine Superintelligence. Consider subscribing to stay up to date with my work. Wow. The Wall Street Journal just reported that, "a consortium of investors led by Elon Musk is offering $97.4 billion to buy the nonprofit that controls OpenAI." Technically, they can't actually do that, so I'm going to assume that Musk is trying to buy all of the nonprofit's assets, which include governing control over OpenAI's for-profit, as well as all the profits above the company's profit caps. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman already tweeted, "no thank you but we will buy twitter for $9.74 billion if you want." (Musk, for his part, replied with just the word: "Swindler.") Even if Altman were willing, it's not clear if this bid could even go through. It can probably best be understood as an attempt to throw a wrench in OpenAI's ongoing plan to restructure fully into a for-profit company. To complete the transition, OpenAI needs to compensate its nonprofit for the fair market value of what it is giving up. In October, The Information reported that OpenAI was planning to give the nonprofit at least 25 percent of the new company, at the time, worth $37.5 billion. But in late January, the Financial Times reported that the nonprofit might only receive around $30 billion, "but a final price is yet to be determined." That's still a lot of money, but many experts I've spoken with think it drastically undervalues what the nonprofit is giving up. Musk has sued to block OpenAI's conversion, arguing that he would be irreparably harmed if it went through. But while Musk's suit seems unlikely to succeed, his latest gambit might significantly drive up the price OpenAI has to pay. (My guess is that Altman will still ma