Hide table of contents

TLDR: If you come across (or have produced) a piece of good content that’s relevant to effective altruism that isn’t on the EA Forum, please consider link-posting it (ideally, with a summary and a note about why you think it's relevant)!

Why link-post or cross-post?

Multiplication of reach: more people will see it

In the past week, the Forum’s Frontpage got around 20K unique pageviews (and this number is growing fast). These views are presumably from people looking for good content. My understanding is that a lot of people scan the Frontpage to see what they might be interested in, then click on posts that sound relevant, skim the beginning, and decide what they should read. 

So if you find a good piece of writing (on “how to do the most good”), an easy way to increase its reach — and to potentially multiply its impact — is to link- or cross-post it to the EA Forum. 

 

Additionally, summaries are great

Even if readers would have seen the content that you’re link-posting, the work that your summary can be really useful. See also: Distillation and research debt, and Suggestion: EAs should post more summaries and collections

Categorization: having all the content tagged and in one place

Moreover, the Forum is useful not just via its Frontpage. Listing most EA content on the Forum also allows us to index (to categorize and sort it), and makes it easier for people to find it in the future if they need something like this. 

For instance, say someone in EA is working on a project on forecasting, or attitudes to veganism, or whatever. To find out what’s already been written on the subject, they might go check the EA Forum’s relevant topic pages (forecasting, dietary change, etc.). If a relevant post has been link- or cross-posted, it will appear there (unless our tagging system has faltered, which happens)

Plus, you might get karma

How and what to cross- or link-post? 

How to cross- and link-post 

(A good portion of this section is copied from this post.)

  • Cross-posts copy the whole body of an external post to the EA Forum
  • Link-posts share the link, and maybe an excerpt, a summary, and/or a note about why the poster thinks that EA Forum users would be interested. (It’s generally best to at least add a summary of the link you’re sharing.) Here is one example.

If you’re the original author, feel free to crosspost or linkpost at will. If you aren’t, feel free to link-post without checking, but please ask for permission before crossposting an entire article or post. (If the author has communicated that they don’t mind it if others crosspost, that’s also perfectly fine.) Note that if you’re reaching out, you can also ask if they’re interested in cross- or link-posting the content themselves. 

The technical aspect

You can format posts as cross- or link-posts by selecting the link icon in the post editor (I recommend doing this if you’re not the original author and are sharing one link): 


 

You don’t need to add “link-post” to the title when you do this. 

What’s actually relevant? 

See here

Some cool examples

Here are some link-posts and cross-posts that I think are great: 

Thanks, everyone! 

Note 1: The title of this post is taken from a similar phrase in Yonatan’s Shortform

Note 2: Repeating from the summary section: you might also be interested in these two posts: Distillation and research debt and Suggestion: EAs should post more summaries and collections
 

Comments2


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Thanks for sharing!

Relatedly to cross-posting, can non-primary authors (i.e. authors who did not create the post) edit and publish the post? If the author of a sequence of posts not originally published on EA Forum, creates an EA Forum sequence which is supposed to contain EA Forum versions of those posts, could such posts be added to the sequence by someone who did not create the sequence?

Hello,

Could you please let me know if adding the original URL on the "link post" section is the same as adding a canonical URL, and the duplicated content on two different websites will not be penalised in terms of SEO?

Thank you!

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
I speak to many entrepreneurial people trying to do a large amount of good by starting a nonprofit organisation. I think this is often an error for four main reasons. 1. Scalability 2. Capital counterfactuals 3. Standards 4. Learning potential 5. Earning to give potential These arguments are most applicable to starting high-growth organisations, such as startups.[1] Scalability There is a lot of capital available for startups, and established mechanisms exist to continue raising funds if the ROI appears high. It seems extremely difficult to operate a nonprofit with a budget of more than $30M per year (e.g., with approximately 150 people), but this is not particularly unusual for for-profit organisations. Capital Counterfactuals I generally believe that value-aligned funders are spending their money reasonably well, while for-profit investors are spending theirs extremely poorly (on altruistic grounds). If you can redirect that funding towards high-altruism value work, you could potentially create a much larger delta between your use of funding and the counterfactual of someone else receiving those funds. You also won’t be reliant on constantly convincing donors to give you money, once you’re generating revenue. Standards Nonprofits have significantly weaker feedback mechanisms compared to for-profits. They are often difficult to evaluate and lack a natural kill function. Few people are going to complain that you provided bad service when it didn’t cost them anything. Most nonprofits are not very ambitious, despite having large moral ambitions. It’s challenging to find talented people willing to accept a substantial pay cut to work with you. For-profits are considerably more likely to create something that people actually want. Learning Potential Most people should be trying to put themselves in a better position to do useful work later on. People often report learning a great deal from working at high-growth companies, building interesting connection
 ·  · 17m read
 · 
TL;DR Exactly one year after receiving our seed funding upon completion of the Charity Entrepreneurship program, we (Miri and Evan) look back on our first year of operations, discuss our plans for the future, and launch our fundraising for our Year 2 budget. Family Planning could be one of the most cost-effective public health interventions available. Reducing unintended pregnancies lowers maternal mortality, decreases rates of unsafe abortions, and reduces maternal morbidity. Increasing the interval between births lowers under-five mortality. Allowing women to control their reproductive health leads to improved education and a significant increase in their income. Many excellent organisations have laid out the case for Family Planning, most recently GiveWell.[1] In many low and middle income countries, many women who want to delay or prevent their next pregnancy can not access contraceptives due to poor supply chains and high costs. Access to Medicines Initiative (AMI) was incubated by Ambitious Impact’s Charity Entrepreneurship Incubation Program in 2024 with the goal of increasing the availability of contraceptives and other essential medicines.[2] The Problem Maternal mortality is a serious problem in Nigeria. Globally, almost 28.5% of all maternal deaths occur in Nigeria. This is driven by Nigeria’s staggeringly high maternal mortality rate of 1,047 deaths per 100,000 live births, the third highest in the world. To illustrate the magnitude, for the U.K., this number is 8 deaths per 100,000 live births.   While there are many contributing factors, 29% of pregnancies in Nigeria are unintended. 6 out of 10 women of reproductive age in Nigeria have an unmet need for contraception, and fulfilling these needs would likely prevent almost 11,000 maternal deaths per year. Additionally, the Guttmacher Institute estimates that every dollar spent on contraceptive services beyond the current level would reduce the cost of pregnancy-related and newborn care by three do
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
Need help planning your career? Probably Good’s 1-1 advising service is back! After refining our approach and expanding our capacity, we’re excited to once again offer personal advising sessions to help people figure out how to build careers that are good for them and for the world. Our advising is open to people at all career stages who want to have a positive impact across a range of cause areas—whether you're early in your career, looking to make a transition, or facing uncertainty about your next steps. Some applicants come in with specific plans they want feedback on, while others are just beginning to explore what impactful careers could look like for them. Either way, we aim to provide useful guidance tailored to your situation. Learn more about our advising program and apply here. Also, if you know someone who might benefit from an advising call, we’d really appreciate you passing this along. Looking forward to hearing from those interested. Feel free to get in touch if you have any questions. Finally, we wanted to say a big thank you to 80,000 Hours for their help! The input that they gave us, both now and earlier in the process, was instrumental in shaping what our advising program will look like, and we really appreciate their support.