It's clear that it's not about doing "the greatest good for the greatest number." If that were the case, the Forum's top priority would be debating the development of motivational strategies for altruistic action. Any attempt to rationalize altruism must start from the obvious fact that altruism is a phenomenon of individual motivation.

Almost all the Forum's content revolves around how to spend resources one doesn't have. At a time when a genuine humanitarian catastrophe is unfolding due to the cessation or reduction of donations to charitable causes internationally, here they debate longtermist questions, animal welfare, or Artificial Intelligence. Pure Byzantineism.

It's obvious that EA is the private property of its leaders and that, therefore, they can do as they please. Without knowing the personal circumstances of these leaders, we can't know what their intentions are. Perhaps media attention on what are considered "big issues" in certain exclusive circles?

At least thanks in large part to the initiative of someone as prominent as Peter Singer, the idea of ​​"effective altruism" came into being. The rationalization of altruism, the possibility of ideological change beyond religion or politics, are possibilities that have, at least, been articulated.