Rebecca

Data Analyst and Consultant @ Quantium
Working (0-5 years experience)
197Sydney NSW 2000, AustraliaJoined Sep 2017

Bio

Data analyst at a consulting firm, previously ran an EA university group.

How others can help me

Suggestions on analyst-type skills to develop that would be useful to EA orgs, and which orgs they would be useful to. Advice on setting up an EA co-working space in Sydney.

How I can help others

Feedback or your ideas!

Comments
46

I don’t think it’s true that they are trying to filter out people they don’t think will make the world a better place. It’s definitely the case that the same person can be rejected or accepted at different stages, so my impression is that the criteria are more about ‘can attending this conference with the goals they’ve outlined, at this time, significantly help this person, and the others attending, increase their impact?’

So e.g. I was accepted to EAG SF 2019 when I was in the process of deciding on a thesis topic, but rejected from EAGx Singapore 2022, most likely for not having enough relevance to Asia (I live in Australia). I felt sad that I couldn’t go, but I think it’s clear that it’s not got anything to do with a judgement of my likelihood of impact as a person.

I’d say that in general in the West, if you as a guy just go up to a random girl on the street and complement her looks, yes that’s considered offensive (bc it’s often a precursor to/intended as unwanted sexual attention, rather than just being an arbitrary social norm). But it’s not in itself offensive: if it’s a friend that you have a level of trust with such that she can believe there’s no unwanted sexual attention behind the comment, I don’t think it’s considered offensive. Perhaps the person who told you this didn’t realise you were friends with the person you complemented? Or perhaps they didn’t realise that by calling something ‘offensive’ you would think it was a transgression rather than just a faux pas?Like I’m pretty confident that overhearing someone calling another person ‘pretty’ is not a red flag that would enter on a community health person’s radar.

Basically my read of the situation is that you were spooked due to miscommunication from one person, and understandably extrapolated an inaccurate belief from that. But given how specific this interaction was, I don’t think it’s fair to say that in general people would easily feel like all their interactions are being monitored.

It also seems like there was some information lost in this anecdote being relayed to Constance - ie she believed that monitoring had taken place, rather than it being likely for people to believe monitoring was taking place (if I’m correct in understanding that you were the person she got the anecdote from).

This is always the danger with information being relayed 2nd and 3rd hand - e.g. I’d be surprised if Scott Alexander would have included Constance’s comment in his post if he’d realised that she’d not spent any time on the applications that were rejected (obviously because she didn’t realise she was meant to!)

I had the same issue. Also guessing that it’s a mobile issue

Yeah I’m quite surprised that he thinks that non-vegetarians would think soy milk tastes as good.l as cow’s milk in cereal.

It reminds me of the time I ate fake-mince bolognese with my vegan friends, and they were so impressed that it tasted exactly like real mince - but to me, who had recently eaten real mince, it tasted like cardboard. I think vegans/vegetarians forget what animal products used to taste like to them. Which is helpful psychologically in staying vegan, but unhelpful when you’re trying to persuade someone to do this sort of switching-out.

This is a great point that even just explaining why the submission/s that won did so is useful to other participants

In “I don’t trust them”, I think Throwaway151 is referring to Kremer and Kemp, not Torres - as you said you didn’t think he had reached out to Kremer and Kemp.

Throwaway151 should have asked Kemp and Cremer about the claim regardless though, and included their response in the post - even if just to disagree with it.

What do you consider to be the etiquette when the person refers to themselves as 'formerly X', or something to that effect?

Out of curiosity, which parts of Austin’s comment suggests to you something about the criteria used?

I think only doing something if it's free/inexpensive is almost the opposite of thinking something is 'really valuable', so that's far from a quibble (almost the opposite because, as you point out, actively being against something is the actual opposite). 

I don’t think the application criteria are implicitly or explicitly based on prior achievements. Not sure how to link to comments on the forum, but somewhere in these comments CEA people suggest it’s more about ‘does this person really know what EA is’, and ‘how Will attending this conference help increase this persons impact’. In another comment I also mention how my experience applying for EAGs aligns with this.

E.g. maybe if it’s uncertain based on a written application whether the person has a good/nuanced understanding of EA, having done an EA internship etc is the only way they can infer this - rather than being about the achievement of getting the internship.

Load More