Hi Simon! Each Slack is only open to registered attendees. To gain access, you'll need to first register for the event, after your application is approved. You'll then be automatically added. 

Hey Bhart! I'm Frances, I work on the EA Global team. 

It looks like this was resolved over email! Our team aims to process travel support requests within 10 working days of submission. In general, we ask that attendees do not assume their travel support will be approved when making plans. We're budget-constrained and unable to fund all those who request support, unfortunately. We also cannot reimburse any incurred costs, should travel support not be approved. Please do feel free to email hello@eaglobal.org at any time if you're confused or have questions, we'll be very happy to help!

Hey Neel! This reply upset me so much that I'm now planning to make AGI and actively oppose AI safety :) Hope it was worth it!

Typical anti-feedback-doomers making everyone scared to plug their ears, where does it end?

Thank you, I have no reply. 

I think this is very brave. 

This is a really good idea actually, but I have to be fundamentally opposed to this comment, sorry :( 

Okay, Claude says, "telling someone "Do better" could technically be considered feedback, but it's extremely limited and not very constructive," which makes it feel like not-quite-feedback. To your first point, I fear I've been shadow banned by the forum for speaking out :( 

That's correct, thanks Toby :) Although, it's really important for us to know if our advertising has been reaching people. We definitely want to know if this post is the first time someone's hearing about EAG, especially if they would have attended had they heard about it earlier. 

I'm definitely sympathetic to this point, yep. I think it would be very difficult to write a post of this nature if you felt that your participation in EA was being wrongly affected by CH.

At the same time, I think both the negative and positive experiences are difficult to talk about, due to their sensitive nature. I felt comfortable writing this because the incident is now four years old and I'm lucky to be in an incredibly supportive environment; many who have had positive experiences will not want to write about them. Thus, I am not confident there is a "large information asymmetry" in either direction, there are deterrents to information sharing on both sides. 

I think the unfortunate reality is: Community Health is not infallible, I would be very keen to hear about mistakes they've made or genuine concerns, as would the team, I'm certain. I'm also acutely aware that a lot of people who exhibit poor behaviour, and are then prevented from taking certain actions within the community, will claim to have been slighted. People who cross clear boundaries and then face consequences do not often go, "this seems right and fair to me, thank you for taking these measures against me to protect others." This is certainly not to say, "no one who says they've been blacklisted or slighted can be correct." This is to say that, I am not sure how to update on claims that CH has damaged people's lives without more information.