Holly Elmore writes about the costs of criticism. One of the most salient things to me here is that criticism disincentivises transparency: people are 'punished' when they are transparent while equal transgressions by people who are not transparent 'go unpunished'.
I want to call out instances of transparency and celebrate them. Here are some instances that have stuck with me – thank you for your time spent writing these up and sharing them with the community:
- Eli Nathan & the 2023 EAG teams, for "How much do EAGs cost and why?"
- MathiasKB, for "Center for Effective Aid Policy has shut down"
- Happier Lives Institute, for engaging with criticism in "Talking through depression: The cost-effectiveness of psychotherapy in LMICs, revised and expanded"
- Givewell and Charity Entrepreneurship/AIM for publicising "moral weights" and similar key metrics/assumptions
- Givewell top charities, but also AMREF, CARE, Living Goods, The Hunger Project, and Doctors Without Borders (from Givewell's special recognition list)
- Manifold Markets, for public meeting notes, financial information, and more.
What have I missed from this list?
Remember: everything has opportunity costs. So before looking at transparent things and assuming they have a positive cost / benefit, consider the fact that to be transparent the person or org didn't do something else.
For e.g. I could list on my website that my major funder is LTFF but honestly that is not in my top 30 tasks.
Let's not justify things just because they feel good. Which is exactly the same trap EAs fall into about giving criticism!
I think we should celebrate doing things which are better than not doing that thing, even if we don't know what the counterfactual would have been. For example:
I appreciate that... (read more)