Not a reply to your comment, but you might be interested in the foundation program from Charity Entrepreneurship

He gives more details in this recent interview: https://youtu.be/yXgDlIlB93A?t=5625

He also briefly talks about what he heard about what happened at Alameda: https://youtu.be/yXgDlIlB93A?t=2859

Thanks for mentioning these errors! Edited the post.

Wrote this on my phone and wasn't offered the option to format the paragraph as a quote (and I don't know what the command is); might come back to edit and fix it later

You can try "> paragraph"

Can't quite express why it feels that way. It reminds me of display scaling issues, where your display resolution doesn't match the native resolution.

Now that you mention it, I feel a bit the same. It might be that we just need to get used to it, but maybe it's the font-weight?

Is the second one better? I just changed font-weight from 450 to 400

You can also turn off the intercom in "Site Customizations" here, and the sidebar by clicking on the hamburger menu on the top left
 

It seems that footnotes got lost when the article was copied to the forum.

From the original article (scroll to the bottom and expand footnotes)

20 million annual spending × 1000x hurdle rate / (71.4 million DALYs/year × $50 thousand (value of DALY) × 10 year duration ) = .00056. Note that we are currently re-examining our value per DALY, but expect that value to either rise or remain the same, so the overall importance of this cause would increase or remain the same.

Sorry for the late reply,

The comment was unnecessarily rude and antagonistic — it didn't meet the minimum bar for civility. (See the Forum norm "Stay civil, at the minimum".)

In isolation, this comment is a mild norm violation. But having a lot of mildly-bad (unnecessarily antagonistic) comments often corrodes the quality of Forum discourse more than a single terrible comment.

It's hard to know how to respond to someone who seems to have a pattern of posting such comments. There's often no "smoking gun" comment that clearly deserves a ban. That's why we have our current setup — we generally give warnings and then proceed to bans if nothing changes.

I think we've not been responding to cases like this enough, recently. At the same time, I wish we could figure out a more collaborative approach than our current one, and it's possible that a 1-month warning was too long — we're discussing it in the moderation team.

(Note: some parts of this comment, as with some other comments that moderators post, were written by other moderators, but I personally believe what I'm posting. This seems worth flagging, given that I'm sharing these opinions as my own. I don't know if all the people on the moderation team agree with everything as I put it here.)

Edited, thank you for flagging all these formatting errors!