All of AviNorowitz's Comments + Replies

Animal Welfare Fund: Ask us anything!

Academic social science research is often a better fit for the EA research fund or Food Systems Fund because of their expertise + focus.


Did you mean the ACE Research Fund / Animal Advocacy Research Fund?

2kierangreig4moFairly sure it was the ACE Research Fund. :)
Being Vocal About What Works

Peter Hurford made a related argument in To Inspire People to Give, Be Public About Your Giving, though it's more focused on maximizing impact vs helping your friends find fulfillment.

EA for Jews - Proposal and Request for Comment

I strongly suspect the kidney donations in question are mostly to other Jews, and maybe mostly to other Orthodox Jews. The organization mentioned in the video is Renewal, which "helps facilitate kidney matches within the Jewish community."

And with regard to Matnat Chaim: "In a report aired on Israel’s Channel 2 Sunday, the Health Ministry said the policy leads to possible discrimination, noting that at least half of Matnat Chaim’s donors request Jewish recipients."

In general, Orthodox Jews are very altruistic towards other Jews, and especially other Orthod... (read more)

4MichaelStJules6moHmm, that's too bad. On Matnat Chaim, another way of looking at it that up to half of the donors did not request Jewish recipients, but maybe those donors were less likely to be Orthodox Jews specifically, though. And even if few donors did not request someone of the same religion or ethnicity, there could till be something to learn from Matnat Chaim's approach. This article [] paints an even more pessimistic picture at the time it was written: almost all of the donors (309 of 311) were Orthodox Jews, and all of them requested Jewish recipients. However, this was earlier in the organization's history, and maybe things have changed since then. I suppose there are also some particularities about Orthodox Judaism and the permissibility of using organs from people who are dying but whose hearts have not yet stopped [] which is apparently how most donations happen (the heart is kept artificially beating), and so live organ donation might be the only practical permissible option for Orthodox Jews to donate and receive kidneys. This might partially explain why they are so much more likely to donate kidneys than average.
3BenSchifman6moThanks Avi -- I think you are right, from what I can tell the kidney donations discussed in those sources are largely within their community. (Although I wonder if they end up triggering any "swap chains [] "?) I appreciate your perspective on the orthodox community, too, which I have relatively little personal experience with (one side of my family is orthodox but I grew up loosely reform). While in general I agree orthodox Jews are probably not the group most likely to get into EA, I figure there's still value in offering some information for any EA-curious orthodox folks out there (though I don't think that will be much of a focus of this site if I end up setting it up).
BrianTan's Shortform

It looks like GiveWell may have advertised on more than 35 podcasts! They talk about their podcast advertising here and here.

4BrianTan9moOh cool. Yeah I had heard that they have been experimenting and have had some success advertising on podcasts. I didn't know though that they've advertised on more than 35 already. I wonder if they're going to try sponsoring YouTube videos next. Not running YouTube ads, but paying so they can be mentioned by a YouTuber with a somewhat EA-aligned audience. I think Lex Fridman [] would be a good example. He interviewed Will MacAskill this year. Maybe that would be worth trying out.
[Expired] 20,000 Free $50 Charity Gift Cards

80,000 Hours is not a US registered nonprofit. CEA accepted donations for them for EA Giving Tuesday with arrangements we made in advance. Around half of the nonprofits on our list required similar arrangements.

FHI is not a US registered nonprofit either and was not eligible for receiving EA Giving Tuesday donations.

[Expired] 20,000 Free $50 Charity Gift Cards

As far as I know Effective Altruism Foundation and Founder's Pledge are totally different nonprofits.

Effective Altruism Foundation runs a few programs, including Center on Long-term Risk:

1Thomas Kwa9moFixed, thanks.
EA towards humans = effective violence towards farm animals?

I'd suggest reading prior discussions of the so-called "poor meat eater problem."

I see a few problems with this argument. (These are mostly not original ideas.)

  • This argument would likely reflect badly on EA and/or animal advocacy if it became more common and more public. Unpopular arguments may be worth it if the benefits of arguing them outweigh the costs, but that seems unlikely here.
  • If you believe farmed animal welfare is the cause area that warrants the highest priority, then you should be looking for the most cost-effective interventions within
... (read more)
3MichaelStJules9moIf (big if!) global poverty work is badly net-negative in the views of those working on animal welfare (kbog concludes income effects are overall good [] ), those working on global poverty might be acting uncooperatively just by working on it. Animal welfare work seems usually unlikely to be bad for humans, including the global poor (since their countries are not usually targeted), and is plausibly pretty good, if you include climate change, zoonotic diseases and antibiotic resistance. However, I think cooperation is more important for those holding less popular positions, since they have less power, and prioritizing animal welfare is less popular than prioritizing global poverty in EA and in general.
3MichaelStJules9moI think it's worth pointing out that some of these effects are much more estimable and likely to be significant than others, and probably many people primarily donating to GiveWell-recommended charities give little weight to speculative considerations; that's often why they're giving to these charities in the first place. * I think the effects on farmed animals (at least numbers) can be estimated fairly rigorously a few decades out based on current consumption rates, trends in consumption, population trends and income elasticities. * I think your first two considerations are pretty speculative, and the kind that should be given little weight unless you think these effects are actually as important or more important than what's actually included in GiveWell's analyses, and if they are, then it would be an amazing coincidence that GiveWell-recommended charities are still the best opportunities among those EA has considered. * The effects on wild animals could potentially be estimated with a wide confidence interval, and considerable deep uncertainty about welfare in the wild. We might even think increasing animal product consumption itself is (sometimes) good because it takes more land and so reduces wild animal populations.
Prepare for Counterfactual Donation Matching on Giving Tuesday, Dec. 1, 2020

Hi Jacob. If you complete our sign-up form or our pledge form, then you'll be added to our mailing list and should receive reminders in future years.

You may also want to add a filter to direct emails from into your primary inbox.

1jacobpfau10moAh great, I have pledged. Is this new this year? Or maybe I didn't fill out the pledge last year; I don't remember.
Coronavirus Research Ideas for EAs works for me. The link you have is for though, which does not work. Maybe that's the problem?

2Peter Wildeford1yFixed - thanks!
Fundraising for the Center for Health Security: My personal plan and open questions

Because Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security is part of Johns Hopkins University rather than its own US registered nonprofit, it may not be feasible to create a Facebook fundraiser for them.

1MichaelA1yGood point. It's indeed not possible to do a "charity" fundraiser for CHS on Facebook. But I can set up a "Fundraiser for personal causes", collect the money myself, and then donate that. (I've tweaked the post to reflect that being my new tentative plan A.) I've now asked a more general question of what the best platform/app/approach would be for situations like this [] (where the intended recipient is not a registered nonprofit). I'd be interested in people's thoughts on that.
The best places to donate for COVID-19

I think the main potential benefits of GiveDirectly's COVID-19 response are (a) good PR for cash transfers, (b) an experiment to learn from, (c) bringing in more donors, and (d) persuading people to stay home rather than work. In terms of benefits for recipients though, it seems much less cost-effective than cash transfers to the extreme poor.

6Peter Wildeford1yI would agree with all of that. I wonder if it still may be more effective than other donations within the domain of COVID-19 response, however?
Notes on how a recession might impact giving and EA

I think Open Philanthropy probably would not reduce it's grantmaking because of a recession. It seems Open Philanthropy is recommending around $200 million in grants per year. Forbes estimates that Dustin Moskovitz has a net worth of around $10 billion. So they're only spending down a mere 2% of Moskovitz's net worth each year. If Moskovitz's net worth declined to $5 billion that would still only be 4% of Moskovitz's net worth. In addition, better funding opportunities for Open Philanthropy may arise during a recession as other large funders pull back.

Chloramphenicol as intervention in heart attacks

This seems to be based on one study of 21 pigs.

2Aaron Gertler2yI wish that the post had been more clear about this. It could still be promising to put together a human trial, of course, but success is far from certain.
Comparing Four Cause Areas for Founding New Charities

I'd expect some effect from that, but probably orders of magnitude smaller than the effect of increasing prices via taxation.

What are good options for giving later?

Assuming you're in the US: How about a Vanguard Brokerage account and a Google spreadsheet?

In a Vanguard Brokerage account, you can invest in something like Total World Stock Market. Then to donate from the account, you could do any of the following:

  • Donate appreciated shares through a Vanguard DAF. I understand that you can open a DAF and close it after you're done making your donation to avoid annual minimums and fees.
  • Donate appreciated shares directly, which you should do only if the recipient organization can easily accept them.
  • Sell the shares
... (read more)
EA Giving Tuesday, Dec 3, 2019: Instructions for Donors

Hi Brian. Thanks for the feedback and letting us know about your experience.

So, in our testing from the US this year, we've seen that donations made at :00 on the dot typically generate receipts with :02. It seems plausible that being in Manila is causing longer than expected delays. Though if you've only tried one $5 donation, perhaps you could try a few more of them?

It's also normal for Facebook to take much longer to return a "Thank you for your purchase ... " than it shows up in your receipt. I'll make a note to clarify th... (read more)

4BrianTan2yThanks for the reply! I'll see if I can try one more test donation. Regarding donating within the first second, I think that sentence would turn away people who were only able to donate within 2 or more seconds. It also sounds really hard at first to donate within the first second. I think it should be communicated that someone who follows the instructions, which should take only 10-20 minutes of pre-work, should be able to donate within 2-3 seconds. That might encourage more people to try joining in!
EA Giving Tuesday, Dec 3, 2019: Instructions for Donors

Hi Mike. Do you think we should be more clear in our language? We're recommending donating within the first second because (a) we want to emphasize the importance of speed and (b) it is plausible the match will actually end in 1 second, even though a few seconds is probably more likely. But we also don't want people to misunderstand the difficulty of this and feel hopeless.

After doing a 5$ practice donation, I re-examined the instructions at and understood you are suggesting get to the "confirm donation page" before the 8am start time. But I think if the recommendation to start the donation prior to 8am was in the "In a nutshell" section I would have figured it out sooner. You might consider editing the third sentence in the first bullet of the "In a nutshell" section to something like "We recommended starting the donation process prior to the official match start s

... (read more)
EA Giving Tuesday, Dec 3, 2019: Instructions for Donors

A $9,999 donation can be finalized in 1 click, so with some preparation and practice, it can be done in 1 second. It's also possible to finalize 2 x $9,999 donations in 1 second, though it requires skill and more practice.

A 1 second match end time is plausible, but it's not the most likely outcome. So probably 2 x $9,999 successful donations in 2 seconds would get matched. The max match amount per donor is $20,000 and this is just $2 short of that.

Choosing effective university for donations

The difference in effectiveness between even EA-aligned organizations may differ by a large factor, much larger than 3x. For instance:

  • This 80,000 Hours survey found that a sample of EA leaders believe that the cost-effectiveness of donating to different EA Funds (representing different cause areas) may differ by up to 33x.
  • GiveWell estimates that the cost effectiveness of their top charities may differ by up to 9x.

So I'd exercise caution before making donation decisions based on a 3x matching opportunity. You could end up donating to something that&apo... (read more)

Should CEA buy

This all sounds correct to me. Just to add: the organization had a revenue of $31 million in 2017, so they're not going to sell their domain for cheap.

Best thing at EAG SF 2019?

I attended only 1 talk aside from the opening and closing session. I filled up most of my time with (a) meetings and office hours with specific goals, (b) conversations with random people, and (c) time to myself. This strategy worked well for me and I'll probably make it a point to attend 0 talks next year.

Through the planned meetings I had, I learned more about (a) career decisions, specifically infosec careers in GCR (b) how to run EA Giving Tuesday better, and (c) prioritizing causes better.

Amazon Smile

They can now be found as "GiveWell" in San Francisco, CA. I think they changed their legal name at some point.

What new EA project or org would you like to see created in the next 3 years?

You can share one login and password among multiple people if you trust your team members enough.

What new EA project or org would you like to see created in the next 3 years?

You can do this for free with Rebrandly, though only the admin account can create links.

2casebash2yInteresting, unfortunately teammates are only available on the $500 per month version :-(
[Link] MacKenzie Bezos signs the Giving Pledge

(I'm not arguing any particular position here. Just mentioning some considerations.)

I think tweeting to Jeff Bezos seems fine, though I'd hope that someone's first response would be "I should make sure Effective Giving saw this" rather than "I should tweet my favorite EA charity at him".

Maybe? Although I think there were some advantages to tweeting him directly:

  • He was asking for tweets, not for organizations to reach out to him via some other way.
  • I imagine it's going to be very, very difficult for organizations to ge
... (read more)
3Aaron Gertler2yI agree with all of these! I don't think that you shouldn't tweet directly in the Bezos situation -- it's just a good idea to tell organizations that might be well-positioned to send their own messages, too. My argument was more "watch out for each other's interests" than "leave it to the professionals".
[Link] MacKenzie Bezos signs the Giving Pledge

Thanks for sharing your views on this. I'm now updating towards the view of "don't tweet wealthy people about EA unless they explicitly ask for donation suggestions."

Here are some past examples of EAs tweeting wealthy people with donation advice:

  • Jeff Bezos: In this case he's asking for advice, so tweets that are consistent with what he's asking for seem appropriate. For instance, I think I suggested GiveDirectly to him. Do you share this view?
  • Ricky Gervais: This seems like the kind of tweet that EAs should not reply to in your
... (read more)
7Aaron Gertler2yI think tweeting to Jeff Bezos seems fine, though I'd hope that someone's first response would be "I should make sure Effective Giving saw this" rather than "I should tweet my favorite EA charity at him". I don't read Ricky Gervais as being entirely unserious, so responding to him might be reasonable. Some considerations I'd make before tweeting at him: * What's his history in this area? Does he have a record of supporting animal charities? Does he Tweet about bacon all the time, making this an obvious joke? * Do the PR people at the animal charities I support know about this Tweet? Should they be the ones to send something, if anyone does? * Are people already deluging him with charity suggestions? If so, how can I make my Tweet stand out, if I plan to send one at all? Try to take the perspective of the famous person who will be skimming over replies; what will make them take notice? What would lead them to actually type a response, or want to set up a phone call? What's the best link to send them if they are busy, impatient, unfamiliar with EA, and reading Twitter from a phone on the way to their next gig?
Why isn't GV psychedelics grantmaking housed under Open Phil?

It's Dustin and Cari's money, so it's their decision what to do with it.

Stories and altruism

The movie Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) caused me to reflect on how people -- including myself -- might rationalize their contributions to harm, or their lack of responsibility for preventing it.

What is the Impact of Beyond Meat?

I think it's bad for Beyond Meat's brand to sell low quality products though as they've done in the past.

What is the Impact of Beyond Meat?

Their approach seems like the right move to me:

At Beyond Meat, we’re constantly innovating and renovating our products based on consumer feedback. Unfortunately, our Chicken Strips weren’t delivering the same plant-based meat experience as some of our more popular products, like the Beyond Burger and Beyond Sausage. But, there’s good news. We have a team of chefs and scientists who are working on getting an even better, tastier version of Beyond Chicken Strips back on retail shel
... (read more)
What is the Impact of Beyond Meat?

I believe sausages typically contain pork, so Beyond Sausages might make the numbers look a little better.

Beyond Meat also had a disappointing chicken product, but it looks like they've discontinued sales, and are working on a better chicken product.

4utilitarian012yI could still see a sizable impact coming from the consumer skipping a meal of chicken that they otherwise would have ate and substituting it with beyond meat. It doesn't have to be an exact substitute.
9Ben_West2yI didn't realize they had discontinued the chicken products. That's too bad
Reasons to eat meat

The Charity Entrepreneurship report doesn't seem to mention that beef cattle spend around half their lives on pasture. They are also including some dairy cattle considerations that don't apply to beef cattle, e.g. tie stalls. I think this might be skewing their report to a more negative estimate than appropriate.

Reasons to eat meat

I think creating distinctions between directly causing harm vs allowing harm to be caused is likely to reduce a person's effectiveness at doing good in the world. I think causing harm in an abstract way that doesn't violate social norms is basically OK if it leads to something more good. For instance, if I advocate to a funder to cut funding to a less effective program and use that funding for a more effective program, I am causing harm to the recipients of the program that got cut. I think that's fine and a good thing to do.

[Question] Pros/Cons of Donor-Advised Fund

A knowledgable EA friend of mine has suggested using DAFs for the limited purpose of donating appreciated stock to organizations that do not routinely handle such requests. He said at Vanguard, you can open a DAF, donate your appreciated stock to the DAF, instruct the DAF to donate the appreciated stock to the organization(s), and then close the DAF.

You can find some more reliable information here, though not from an EA perspective.

kbog did an oopsie! (new meat eater problem numbers)

Thanks for following up on this and posting a correction. I'd suggest updating your original post to include your updated fish consumption estimates. Or if that's too much work, a correction on that post with a link to this new one would be helpful. As it stands now, it still says: "I also excluded fish because there is no significant correlation between income and fish consumption in African countries." I think people are likely to find your original post when researching the meat eater problem, especially since the corresponding EA Concepts page cites it.

3kbog2ykk will add a link. But major edits would be a pain because the old post is in HTML.
Why animal charities are much more effective than human ones

Since there are less than 1 million elephants alive today, even if each elephant has modestly more moral value than each human, elephant welfare is still very unlikely to meet the importance criteria.

Some information on the use of fish oil in aquaculture

Thanks for the feedback! Yes, I agree that many of the considerations for fishmeal and fish oil are similar. I originally wrote this post a long time ago which is why I did not reference your report in it, but I've now included it under "Some useful sources."

A few comments on your report:

  • Your report says: "These days, any of the fish that are farmed more intensively around the world are carnivorous ... " This was confusing on a first read, but I assume that was a typo and you meant many? As far as I know, the vast majority of farm
... (read more)
EA Forum Prize: Winners for February 2019

I'm surprised that "After one year of applying for EA jobs: It is really, really hard to get hired by an EA organisation" did not win, given that:

  • It started an important conversation, likely valuable for people seeking EA jobs, people providing EA career advice, and people hiring for EA jobs.
  • It generated 259 upvotes and 177 comments, which is more than I remember ever seeing.
  • It must have been unusually difficult for the author to write.

I'll disclose that as one of the voters, I found this post very interesting and helpful, but I didn't value it as much as the specific research content that won the top three prizes. (Though note that I recuse myself from voting on content from Rethink Priorities.)

7Denise_Melchin2yAs one of the people who voted, I was also surprised and disappointed by this. But different voters applied different standards on what kind of content they wish to support.
5Evan_Gaensbauer2yEdit: The original text of this comment below remains unedited, but I made the mistake of stating the CEA sets the conditions of the EA Forum Prizes, when they only provide the funding for them. Summary: It makes sense the EA Forum is currently set up to promote or incentivize content that clearly advances one or more of EA's current objectives framed so it's generally accessible. That content is prioritized based on the view it's the most important role or function the EA Forum serves as a platform. This is different than the priority of promoting and incentivizing popular content, because it raises awareness and starts a conversation of what is a top priority for the greatest number of community members (active on the EA Forum). This post advances the latter as opposed to the former goal, which is probably why it wouldn't receive an EA Forum Prize. It seems starting a conversation about what the priorities for promotion and incentives on the EA Forum, and what the criterion for selecting those priorities, should be would be how to best broach this subject. Why different posts receive the reward, and why this post didn't receive the reward, is a matter of what kind of posts people want to reward and incentivize, and why. It also makes sense to keep in mind the rewards are given and the EA Forum maintained by the Centre for Effective Altruism (CEA) as an institution. I'm aware with the current strategy for the EA Forum, the goal is to promote content that is: * generally accessible. * content that is more basic, and doesn't assume advanced background knowledge of one or more particular cause areas. * makes intellectual and/or material progress on the general goals of effective altruism, or successfully appeals to a wide audience about why and how a particular means can be applied to achieve those goals. This is based on the ultimate goal of having the EA Forum be a platform primarily focused on community-building, both in terms of growing the eff
5Evan_Gaensbauer2yDovetailing Milan, I remember from a discussion in the comments of that post itself, it was reckoned that even taking into account changes to the karma system in the EA Forum 2.0, that post received the highest absolute number of upvotes from any post in the history of the EA Forum.
9Milan_Griffes2y+1, very surprised by this. I believe it's the most-upvoted post of all time, plus probably quite helpful to many stakeholders in the community.
Sharing my experience on the EA forum

Perhaps a prompt to give optional anonymous, private, and/or brief constructive feedback after each upvote/downvote could help posters learn what was good/bad about the post while avoiding most of the costs of posting a lengthy comment.

8Aaron Gertler2yI don't love the idea (suggested by one comment here) of having separate anonymous feedback, for these reasons: * Public feedback allows people to upvote comments if they agree (very efficient for checking on how popular a view is) * Public feedback makes it easier for the author to respond * Most importantly, public feedback generally strengthens our norm of "it's okay to criticize and to be criticized, because no one is perfect and we're all working together to improve our ideas". Of course, these factors have to be balanced against the likelihood that anonymous feedback mechanisms will allow for more and more honest feedback, which is a considerable upside. But I'd hope that the EA community, of all groups, can find a way to thrive under a norm of transparent feedback.
2Max_Daniel2yMy initial reaction is to really like the idea of being prompted to give anonymous feedback. I think there probably are also reasons against this, but maybe it's at least worth thinking about. (One reason why I like this is that it would be helpful for authors and mitigate problems such as the one expressed by the OP. Another reason is that it might change the patterns of downvotes in ways that are beneficial. For example, I currently almost never downvote something that's not spam, but quite possibly it wouldn't be optimal if everyone used downvotes as narrowly [though I'm not sure and feel confused about the proper role of downvotes in general]. At the same time, I often feel like the threshold for explaining my disagreement in a non-anonymous comment would be too high. I anticipate that the opportunity to add anonymous feedback to a downvote would sometimes make me express useful concerns or disagreements I currently don't express.)
Potential funding opportunity for woman-led EA organization

The eligibility criteria seems to rule out nearly all EA-aligned organizations:

  • "Nominees must meet the following requirements to be eligible ... "
  • "Legal residents of one (1) of the fifty (50) United States or the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, or Canada (excluding Quebec) (“Territory”)"
  • "A creator or founder of a social impact organization (“Organization”) that ... Has a primary objective related to improving health, education, or esteem or to leadership development and serves low- and middle-income women and/or children in the
... (read more)
3Khorton3yYeah, I don't know of any EA organisations that primarily serve North American women and children.
Bounty: Guide To Switching From Farmed Fish To Wild-Caught Fish

I agree with Jim's comment above. As the graph here suggests, the supply of wild fish appears to have been flat since the 90s, and the increase in demand has been met by the supply of farmed fish. So I think it's likely that consumption of wild fish will just cause someone else to consume farmed fish instead.

With regard to fish oil: Most of it originates from small wild fish such as anchovies. There's an entire industry dedicated to harvesting fish oil and fishmeal, and most of it is used as feed for carnivorous farmed fish like salmon. Fish... (read more)

Rodents farmed for pet snake food

Thanks for working on this! I'm impressed by this and your other work on identifying and investigating groups of farmed animals that exist in large numbers but have been overlooked by other EAs, researchers, advocates, etc.

The Narrowing Circle (Gwern)

Government social safety nets for elderly people (such as Social Security in the US) reduce the need for young adults to provide direct care to their elderly parents. This seems likely related.

To me this seems more of an expansion in moral circles though. Most of us in the developed world now seem to think that we're responsible for everyone's elderly parents rather than just our own.

4Milan_Griffes3yEh, but nowadays we're "responsible" in a way that carries dark undertones. Many US elderly aren't embedded in multigenerational communities, but instead warehoused in nursing homes (where they aren't in regular contact with their families & don't have a clear role to play in society). Hard to say whether this is an improvement over how things were 100 years ago. I do know that I'm personally afraid of ending up in a nursing home & plan to make arrangements to reduce the probability of such.
EA Giving Tuesday Donation Matching Initiative 2018 Retrospective

An update: We've sent follow-up e-mails to all organizations expected to receive a nontrivial amount of donations and/or matches informing them the amounts they should be receiving. Some organizations have helpfully reported to us the donated, matched, and/or total amounts that either (a) Facebook informed them they'll be receiving or (b) they've already received. For the organizations that have reported at least some of this information, the table under "Estimated from Fundraisers vs. Reported by Organizations" on our "Donate... (read more)

Hit Based Giving for Global Development

This announcement today on GiveWell's blog looks relevant. It seems GiveWell is beginning to look at interventions consistent with a hits-based giving approach.

EAs Should Invest All Year, then Give only on Giving Tuesday

Yes, this was a problem in both 2017 and 2018, and our 2018 match percent would have been higher than 65% without these problems. I think Cullen's estimates account for this though.

In 2018 we conducted a survey try to to understand this better. We should be able to use some of the results to make better recommendations in 2019.

I don't think Facebook permits automated donations, so I don't think this will be feasible.

1Aaron Gertler3yIt also seems risky as a feature to develop when we can't predict what Facebook will do in the future. (I'm a huge advocate for EA Giving Tuesday as a project, but only in the context of "we're pretty sure Facebook will have a match", and I think it's still too new to be very confident that things will keep working in the same way.)
RC Forward - Canada's Effective Giving Experiment: Results & Plans for 2019

Thanks for all this work on this! A few comments and questions:

1. I think there's another important benefit that I didn't see mentioned: There's a risk that people's donations may be influenced towards less effective organizations just for the tax deduction. Permitting people to get tax deductions when donating to a wide variety of effective organizations can help mitigate this risk. My guess is that this is a more important consideration than tax deductions providing incentives to donate more.

2. Do Canadian donors already have a way to... (read more)

7siobhanbrenton3y1. Thanks for pointing this out! I agree and I think that there is a large market of Canadians wanting to donate effectively that have not yet been reached, or have not yet heard about high-impact giving. We are working on ways to take over more of the Canadian donor market share in 2019 and this would be impossible without tax incentives like the ones we have provided. 2. I don't believe there is an easy way to give to EA Funds at the moment, but we are constantly adding more options for effective giving. Since CEA is a registered 501(c)(3) in the United States we could see this option being added to the platform in 2019, provided our setup would work with the way CEA administrates EA Funds. 3. We are currently using CHIMP's software for direct donations made via credit card and are unable to change the functions pre-set in their provided donation buttons, so adding a 'tip' option for credit card donations is unlikely but worth exploring. However many of our donations are made through either Interac E-transfers or cheques, which are administered without the use of a donor-filled form for now. Once RC Forward receives tax-exempt status we will be working on ways to automate tax-receipting, and adding a tip option for donors to opt-in to during information collection is a great idea!
EAs Should Invest All Year, then Give only on Giving Tuesday

It's also notable that PayPal announced that they were doing a dollar-for-dollar match of up to $500k in donations through the PayPal Giving Fund on Giving Tuesday, separately from the Facebook match.

That post was made on Giving Tuesday itself and the details there are very limited, but I found this post by an organization with a date of Nov 23, along with the match start and end time. I'm going to dig into this some more. Maybe we can ask some EA-aligned organizations signed up for the PayPal Giving Fund if they can keep an eye out for this and ... (read more)

Load More