Hi! I'm not an expert in survey design, but I'd love to get the most out of the data you collect here, so some thoughts as I read through it (ignore if unhelpful):

• "Think about the other people who work with you at your organization: Are managers and supervisors at your organization disproportionately one gender? If so, which?"
  • I would find this more helpful if it asked what percentage of managers and supervisors at my organization were men (or women or also asked about nonbinary) to get numerical and not make too much depend on what "disproportionate" means
• "Think about your interactions in EA social spaces (e.g. conferences, social retreats). While in these spaces, how often have you felt, or do you feel, each of the following? (Don’t worry about whether you can pinpoint exact moments.)"
  • Really interested in this, and I'm glad you pulled professional contexts out, though I'd also really want to know about conferences and retreats separate from general social spaces
• "Think of all the granters and regranters you've ever known of or heard about. How many of them were of what gender? (# women, # men, # third gender/nonbinary, etc.)"
  • This seems most useful as numerical answers rather than having them all put in the same box for data analysis purposes
• "If you hypothetically raised concerns about cause area prioritization on the EA Forum, how confident do you feel that your concerns would be taken seriously?
  • I realize all of these things are fuzzy, and it's still good to know about fuzzy things, but I would understand results better with some operationalization of taken seriously.
• "Have you ever encountered any of these behaviors while at work?"
  • Might be more helpful to have the frequency markers than the yes/no? I realize this makes the survey longer.

It's always easier to critique than to make things, so kudos for trying to do a thing and hope this is helpful.

(I'll also probably just flag the obvious about selection bias and the sensitivity of this data.)

This seems worth an experiment.

It looks great, and there are a few others I like as well, but does this let you visualize your own credences? That's what seems like the value here, to me.

I don't know if it's exactly this that will save all communication or anything, but I would be excited to see if this kind of thing could be used to quickly convey takes on even hard community issues in addition to object level things, especially since it points in the direction of considering multiple hypotheses.

e.g. I really loved this picture from this post and even made this speadsheet so you could put in your own numbers, and it seems like a standard part of data visualization to let people see the differences between distributions clearly

Strong agree with "just because something was hard for staff, doesn't necessarily mean it was hard because the critical comments were wrong/misguided.", though I think "part of the reason some folks could find a situation like this stressful is precisely because they felt that some of the objections and critical comments were reasonable" doesn't differentiate between different worlds - I think there would be a lot of flurry and frenzy and stress basically independently of reasonableness of critique (within some bounds).

Fwiw, I do think "has no place in the community" without being owned as "no place in my community" or "shouldn't have a place in the community" is probably too high a simulacrum level by default (though this isn't necessarily a criticism of Shakeel, I don't remember what exactly his original comment said.)

Really appreciated a bunch about this comment. I think it's that it:

• flags where it comes from clearly, both emotionally and cognitively
• expresses a pragmatism around PR and appreciation for where it comes from that to my mind has been underplayed
• Does a lot of "my ideal EA", "I" language in a way that seems good for conversation
• Adds good thoughts to the "what is politics" discussion

Is this different from how letters of intent usually work?