A friend asked about effective places to give. He wanted to donate through his payroll in the UK. He was enthusiastic about it, but that process was not easy.

1.  It wasn't particularly clear whether GiveWell or EA Development Fund was better and each seemed to direct to the other in a way that felt at times sketchy.
2. It wasn't clear if payroll giving was an option
3. He found it hard to find GiveWell's spreadsheet of effectiveness
    

Feels like making donations easy should be a core concern of both GiveWell and EA Funds and my experience made me a little embarrassed to be honest.

Though I'm curious as to what would happen here. I would probably tweet 80k stuff in different circumstances if they became written for experts rather than amateurs. There is something very successful about engaged individuals taking and sharing 80k's stuff.

And by "reading their work" you mean, be emailing and tweeting articles at journalists asking what they think? Ie what would 80,000 Hours acting like a thnk tank look like? 

Those who consider themselves as being highly engaged in EA report taking on positions in local EA groups and EA organizations and engaging in the EA Forum and EA events at higher rates than their peers in the movement who consider themselves less involved.

To me this looks like an artefact of the original categories.

High engagement: I am heavily involved in the effective altruism community, perhaps helping to lead an EA group or working at an EA-aligned organization. I make heavy use of the principles of effective altruism when I make decisions about my career or charitable donations.

It looks to me that to self define as a high engagement EA you are being asked if you are lead a group or or work at an EA org. It doesn't seem surprising that the two correlate. 

I think I recall thinking this while I took the survey, tbh. I feel engaged, but I'm not sure I fit into that category. 

The idea that people who give significant amounts of money by EA lights*  aren't really  engaged because they don't work in EA orgs or lead groups seems unhelpful. This seems to be the case since moderate-engagement EAs both earn more and a higher percentage say they give. I say this not because it is the most important factor but because it's the one I can see in the data.

I might suggest that in future either this is rephrased entirely to be about "feeling very much a part of the movement" or that the first  sentence reads as follows
 

"I am heavily involved in the effective altruism community. This might mean many things,  perhaps helping to lead an EA group, attending a number of groups, giving  an amount of money  I consider significant by EA principles or working in an EA-aligned career."

Thanks again for your work.

I made a discord. Anyone can join here. https://discord.gg/aYS7Hb2s 

I think slack has higher barriers to entry. I'm going to try a discord and if it gets no takeup I can try something else. 

I think anyone is welcome to create their own facebook equivalent but I am going to make a discord.

Sure but you only have a better chance among the people who are already on the slack. EA anywhere has 176 members. That doesn't seem like that much additional benefit.