22 karmaJoined


This account has been established by a long-term EA with the sole purpose of participating in this discussion: while maintaining complete anonymity due to concerns of potential retaliation.


Do you have plans to exclude Nonlinear from the events in the near future?

These statements primarily consist of subjective impressions regarding the characters of the individuals involved, rather than concrete claims. The responsibility of providing proof does not rest with me. Regarding potential claims, such as Nonlinear actively attempting to tarnish victims' reputation, it may be prudent to approach the Community Health department to inquire if they have been approached by Nonlinear. Such an inquiry could substantiate the validity of these rumors.

Additionally, should further investigation be desired, it might be worthwhile to contact relevant funders in the space to ascertain if they have ever been approached regarding the victims and the nature of those interactions. It's essential to recognize that we are currently navigating the realm of hearsay and gossip. A capable investigator, therefore, holds the key to uncovering the factual truth. The pertinent question remains as to who will assume the responsibility of delving deeper into this case, or indeed, if an investigation is warranted at all.

In light of the established facts, including instances of psychological manipulation to establish a purported "family unit," solicitation of employees to transport recreational substances across borders, and insistence on driving without a valid license, coupled with threats to damage reputations and legal action against the author of this post – all of which have been corroborated by Nonlinear – the paramount issue emerges: How many instances of misconduct must accumulate before a decision is reached to exclude Nonlinear from this community?

If a more extensive examination is deemed necessary, it should be entrusted to the appropriate authorities. In this context, the Community Health unit should stand ready to address such matters with utmost professionalism, impartiality, and a deep commitment to the welfare of the victims of any alleged abuse.

It appears that Nonlinear has reached out to several individuals, likely more than one, to request positive comments about their interactions. To maintain a balanced perspective and offer a more comprehensive view, it would be fair and valuable to share experiences from the other side of the spectrum. This would be especially beneficial for those who have only encountered positive interactions with Nonlinear and may benefit from a more well-rounded understanding.

Could you kindly provide information regarding the initial reporting of the case to the Community Health committee, along with the identity of the individual or individuals entrusted with the case's investigation?

Is it within the realm of possibility that the relationship between Julia Wise and Kat Woods, as evidenced by the content accessible via the following link:, may have influenced the expeditiousness with which the Community Health committee executed pertinent actions?

Your assertion that, "We were familiar with many (but not all) of the concerns raised ...," piques curiosity as to which specific concerns had been previously acknowledged. Furthermore, could you elucidate the methodologies employed to ascertain their veracity?

In the spirit of transparency, and recognizing the historical underreporting tendencies of certain individuals like Julia Wise, it would be appreciated if you could enumerate the precise steps undertaken in the course of taking actions as alluded to.

Given the gravity of allegations, such as the solicitation of recreational substances from employees and the encouragement of unlicensed driving, is there not ample cause for the temporary suspension of individuals such as Emerson and Kat from participation in community events and forum activities? What threshold of misconduct would necessitate the Community Health committee to perceive such behavior as detrimental to the Effective Altruism community, thus contravening its mission and setting an undesirable precedent for newcomers?

To facilitate a clearer understanding of the investigative timeline, could you please divulge the duration of the ongoing investigation, its commencement date, and your projected timeline for the publication of conclusive findings?

Have people seen this?

This was posted in the comments on Eliezer's FB profile.

I have had the opportunity to engage with individuals from both sides of this narrative. In terms of the individuals who are wronged, I find no reason to doubt their accounts. During my conversation with one individual, it was apparent that they harbored a deep apprehension regarding the expression of their views regarding Nonlinear. To the best of my recollection, it appears that individuals affiliated with Nonlinear made efforts to influence the funding-related processes in which they were involved, or, perhaps, made implicit threats to tarnish their reputation. There were reports of the spreading of damaging rumors by Nonlinear about this person among individuals of influence who were pertinent to their career.

Additionally, I had an encounter with a member of the Nonlinear team, and the interaction left a markedly negative impression on me. Their conduct oscillated between affectionate overtures and profoundly manipulative behavior, which gave rise to an unsettling sensation. As a mature individual, I do not easily succumb to fear or intimidation, but there was a discernible disconcerting quality in our discourse, particularly in their openness about using people for personal gain.

While I acknowledge that my impressions are inherently subjective, the depictions outlined in this article appear to closely correspond with my own experiences on both the side of the alleged victims and the accused.

I possess some additional information; however, I am currently inclined to maintain my anonymity. This inclination is driven by Emerson's efforts to employ legal threats in an attempt to intimidate the author.

I don't think the initial goal of this discussion was to punish anyone socially. In my view, the author shared their findings because they were worried about our community's safety. Then, people in our community formed their own opinions based on what they read.

In the comments, you can see a mix of things happening. Some people asked questions and wanted more information from both the author and the person being accused. Others defended the person being accused, and some just wanted to understand what was going on.

I didn't see this conversation starting with most people wanting to punish someone. Instead, it seemed like most of us were trying to find out the truth. People may have strong feelings, as shown by their upvotes and downvotes, but I think it's important to be optimistic about our community's intentions.

Some people are worried that if we stay impartial for too long, wrongdoers might not face any consequences, which is like letting them "get away with murder," so to speak. On the other hand, some are concerned about the idea of "cancel culture." But overall, it seems like most people just want to keep our community safe, prevent future scandals, and uncover the truth.

Hi Zeynep, to ensure transparency, could you kindly confirm whether you were prompted by any Nonlinear team members to make this comment or if you were made aware of this discussion by them?

Hello Alexandra, to ensure transparency, could you kindly confirm whether you were prompted by Kat or other Nonlinear team members to make this comment or if you were made aware of this discussion by them?

Load more