## Effective Altruism ForumEA Forum

david_reinstein

I am a 'Senior Economist' at Rethink Priorities (https://www.rethinkpriorities.org/our-team)

Podcasts: "Found in the Struce" https://anchor.fm/david-reinstein

and the EA Forum podcast: https://anchor.fm/ea-forum-podcast (co-founder, regular reader)

My previous and ongoing research focuses on determinants and motivators of charitable giving (propensity, amounts, and 'to which cause?'), and drivers of/barriers to effective giving, as well as the impact of pro-social behavior and social preferences on market contexts.

I'm working to impact EA fundraising and marketing; see https://daaronr.github.io/ea_giving_barriers/index.html, innovationsinfundraising.org, and giveifyouwin.org.

# Wiki Contributions

What are some artworks relevant to EA?

I thought you might also highlight classic, historical, and even ancient works that convey important ideas?

ImpactMatters was acquired by CharityNavigator; but it doesn't seem to have been incorporated, presented, or used in a great way. (Update/boost)

David Moss:

There was some discussion of the original acquisition here.

Historically, Charity Navigator has been extremely hostile to effective altruism, as you probably know, so perhaps this isn't surprising

My response

Thank you, I had not seen Luke Freeman @givingwhatwecan's earlier post

That 2013 opinion piece/hit job is shocking. But that was 9 years ago or so.

I doubt CN would have acquired IM just to bury it; there might be some room for positive suasion here.

ImpactMatters was acquired by CharityNavigator; but it doesn't seem to have been incorporated, presented, or used in a great way. (Update/boost)

Moving some comments from the Shortform...

Aaron Gertler wrote:

I spent a few minutes looking at the impact feature, and I... will also go with "not satisfied".

From their review of Village Enterprise:

Impact & Results scores of livelihood support programs are based on income generated relative to cost. Programs receive an Impact & Results score of 100 if they increase income for a beneficiary by more than $1.50 for every$1 spent and a score of 75 if income increases by more than $0.85 for every$1 spent. If a nonprofit reports impact but doesn't meet the threshold for cost-effectiveness, it earns a score of 50.


My charitable interpretation is that the "$0.85" number is meant to represent one year's income, and to imply a higher number over time (e.g. you have new skills or a new business that boosts your income for years to come). But I also think it's plausible that "$0.85" is meant to refer to the total increase, such that you could score "75" by running a program that, in your own estimation, helps people less than just giving them money.

(The "lowest score is 50" element puzzled me at first, but this page clarifies that you score "0" if CN can't find enough information to estimate your impact in the first place.)

Still, this is much better than the original CN setup, and I hope this is an early beta version with many improvements on the way.

Effective altruism

Effective altruism is the project of using evidence and reason to find out how to do the most good and to act on these findings.

I think this is slightly better than CEA's statement

Effective altruism is about using evidence and reason to figure out how to benefit others as much as possible, and taking action on that basis.

But I'd still want perhaps to moderate this a bit, if there's a way of doing so while still being clear and concise

"to find out how to do the most good"

... We can only aim to figure out how to do the most good. We will never know with certainty.

"how to do the most good and to act on these findings"

... This seems better than CEA's “as much as possible” which suggests that we must be completely self-sacrificing.

...But still 'the most good' seems a bar too high. Perhaps something like “as much good as possible, to the best of our knowledge, given the amount of our resources we are willing and able to contribute.” ?

[Creative Writing Contest][Fiction] Do Good Better

Sorry, it got set as a draft when I edited it. Should be up again now here

The EA Forum Podcast is up and running

I think I'm going to give this a rest on my end. It's not clear to me that people prefer this over the Nonlinear Library tts to make it worth doing.

I personally prefer/like hearing human narrators (especially if read-by-author), but this doesn't mean other people like it, or like hearing me read stuff.

Name for the larger EA+adjacent ecosystem?

As I mentioned above, cf “Brights”

Name for the larger EA+adjacent ecosystem?

Not bad but maybe not catchy enough? I’m also worried about the connotation of “pearl” as in a prized thing.

Worried about analogue where some atheists and rationalists started calling themselves “Brights” and everyone threw up in their mouth a little. :)