Context
I'm working to build supporters and 'founding committee' for an 'Unjournal' ... funding journal-independent peer review, evaluation, and rating of projects and papers relevant to global priorities and EA. We'll have an initial focus on empirical work and on social science/econ/impact evaluation. And we have some funding now, thanks to the LTFF (and ACX)!
See:
- Looking to gain credible supporters and feedback, and build a 'founding committee' to set up rules and get things rolling,
- Scoping the potential coverage of the unjournal, and potential audiences and interested reviewers and editor-esque managers
- Looking for 'key examples of relevant research projects/papers', including projects to use as test-cases
Looking for lists (and suggestions)
I was going to build an Airtable/database for linked lists like...
- Researchers/academics who have spoken at EA conferences
- ... or who have affiliations with EA orgs or who are known to be
- EA-adjacent open-science advocates and publication innovators
- Academic research groups doing EA-adjacent work
But before I get started, maybe there are some existing lists. I'll compile whatever is shared with me, and probably use it as input to an Airtable (with acknowledged sources, obviously)
Additional note/suggestions
I'll soon put out a more prominent 'call for interest, applications, nominations, and suggestions' for both members of the founding/managing committee and for projects/papers to start with. ... But I welcome suggestions now too.
I also may put a 'bounty' on this (rewards for accepted suggestions) ... which will, of course, be retroactive if it happens.
There is precedence for episodes of harassment in the community [1]. One motivated and misguided individual could use this list to conduct more harassment in the future.
There is also precedence for scams directed at academics - I remember distinctly one such scam where one of my colleague's account was spoofed and they tried to scam money out of me.
Overall I agree that this is less risky than a list of people who share a particular belief, and as risky as other public lists of scientists by field. But I think this these previous lists are also iffy and maybe should be more private.
There are some lists circulating in the community which are not public but are free to be shared privately. I think this is a good model to imitate, where people interested in accessing the database could reach out to you for access, stating their purpose in the process.
I will not enter in details