Do you think they intend for less visibility or to signal it's a lower standard?

Good point.

Fun UK innovative policy competition:

https://heywoodfoundation.com/contest/

Maybe shortform posts could graduate to being normal posts if they get some number of upvotes?

Sorry, you're right.
 

For anyone interested, the video is here 

I don't think the coversation here goes that well. Rogan can be conspiratorially minded and so Yglesias (to my mind) tries to correct some of that, which becomes a bit patronising in tone. I wouldn't be surprised if he felt it went poorly. The youtube video has equal likes and dislikes, which is very bad (you usually expect a ratio of 10-100x more likes, I guess) .

I don't think this is particularly useful, but it does show the risk of introducing ideas on a large program which is tonally different to yours - JRE is socially conservative, politically left  but critical of the left and a bit conspiratorial, Yglesias is technocratic and wonkish. 

But good on him for mentioning GiveWell and good on Rogan for having someone relatively different on. Apologies if this is garbled, it's quite late here. Happy to explain points if necessary.

Thanks for engaging here Elijah and thanks for your hard work. It means a lot to me and I am sure many others here. 

Thanks for writing this piece.

And good on Charity Navigator for the change. I hope it works out well for them and that more effective charities get more donations as a result.

I suggest that if people were seen to be abusing the functionality people wouldn't upvote those posts.

I can understand that post karma should be worth more than comment karma though.

Also, I'm not sure how much the community cares about karma.  Not saying it doesn't, I just don't know.

I think this is unnecessary. If you provide comments that people agree with that exactly the sort of thing we want to upvote and hence provide karma to.

What's more, it encourages other people to add their own statements to your poll to gain karma. To me, the incentives look entirely correct here.

Happy to be wrong.