I'm the chief of staff and also work on strategy at 80k. Before that, I was the initial program officer for global catastrophic risk at Open Phil. Comments here are my own views only, not my present or past employers', unless otherwise specified.
Also seems relevant that both 80k and CEA went through YC (though I didn't work for 80k back then and don't know all the details).
Indeed, IIRC, EAs tend to be more progressive/left-of-center than the general population. I can't find the source for this claim right now.
The 2019 EA Survey says:
"The majority of respondents (72%) reported identifying with the Left or Center Left politically and just over 3% were on the Right or Center Right, very similar to 2018."
I figured some people might be interested in whether the orientation toward longtermism that Michelle describes above is common at EA orgs, so I wanted to mention that almost everything in this post could also be describing my personal experience. (I'm the director of strategy at 80,000 Hours.)
I think this request undermines how karma systems should work on a website. 'Only people who have engaged with a long set of prerequisites can decide to make this post less visible' seems like it would systematically prevent posts people want to see less of from being downvoted.
I really like Holly Elmore's blogpost "Kicking an Addiction to Self-Loathing."
Most native English speakers from outside of particular nerd cultures also would have no clue what it means.
Fwiw, the forum explicitly discourages unnecessary rudeness (and encourages kindness). I think tone is part of that and the voting system is a reasonable mechanism for setting that norm. But there's room for disagreement.
If the original poster came back and edited in response to feedback or said that the tone wasn't intentional, I'd happily remove my downvote.
I downvoted this. "Please, if you disagree with me, carry your precious opinion elsewhere" reads to me as more than slightly rude and effectively an intentional insult to people who disagree with the OP and would otherwise have shared their views. I think it's totally reasonable to worry in advance about a thread veering away from the topic you want to discuss and to preempt that with a request to directly answer your question [Edited slightly] and I wouldn't have downvoted without the reference to other people's "precious views."
Lobbying v. grassroots advocacy
This is just semantic but I think you probably don't want to call what you're proposing a "lobbying group." Lobbying usually refers to one particular form of advocacy (face to face meetings with legislators) and in many countries it is regulated more heavily than other forms of advocacy.
(It's possible that in the UK, "lobbying group" means something more general but in the U.S.)
 This is true in the U.S., which I know best. Wikipedia suggests it's true in the EU but appears less true in the UK.
Who else is working on this?
Here are a couple small examples of things being done along these lines, though I agree there is little overall:
-Resolve to Save Lives claims to do some advocacy for epidemic preparedness in low-income countries in collaboration with the Global Health Advocacy Incubator. The latter group seems to be hiring an Advocacy Director though the posting is old so I wouldn't be surprised if it's out of date.
-PATH has done some advocacy to encourage the U.S. government to invest in global health security.