Along with my co-founder, Marcus A. Davis, I run Rethink Priorities. I'm also a Grant Manager for the Effective Altruism Infrastructure Fund and a top forecaster on Metaculus. Previously, I was a professional data scientist.
My goal is to scalably employ many well-qualified researchers to work on the world's most important problems.
Hey Yonatan, glad to see you doing this just wanted to drop a quick note saying that we'd really appreciate your support at Rethink Priorities! We wrote a post outlining our funding needs and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.
I'm very excited to see this. To be honest when I first heard of the "evaluate the evaluators" project I was very skeptical and thought it would just be a rubber stamp on the EA ecosystem in a way that would play well for social media and attract donations.
I definitely was wrong!
It's good to see that there actually was substantive meta-evaluation here and that the GWWC meta-evaluators did not pull punches!
I agree with this and I'd also be curious to hear more details about where GWWC's current funding does come from, to help evaluate the extent to which GWWC is impartial (though to be clear I do think GWWC is impartial).
I'm really happy to see the “Add 10% to support our work” button and I check this every time it comes up!
FWIW I would've expected the Content Manager manages the Content Specialist, not the other way around.
Rethink Priorities needs your support. Here's what we'd do with it.
What's the difference between a Content Specialist and a Content Manager?
Just to be clear, Lizka isn't being replaced and you're a new, additional content manager? Or does Lizka have a new role now?
Sorry I missed that. I think that's a sensible way to handle ballot exhaustion.
I assume in the renormalization step there will still be exhausted ballots (e.g., they voted for three orgs and none of the orgs made it). I assume then the plan would be that those ballots just won't continue to matter in the election? I know this sounds bad the way I'm writing it, but this is how ranked choice voting works and seems totally fine + normal to me, just wanted to make sure you've thought about it because I didn't see it mentioned.
I also assume that the way the renormalization step works is that if everyone gets 10pts and someone voted A - 6pts, B - 2pts, C - 2pts and then A is eliminated, their ballot is then changed to "B - 5pts, C - 5pts"? And if B is also eliminated, their ballot becomes "C - 10pts"?
Also do you allow for undervoting (e.g., a ballot that doesn't allocate points to three options but is just "A - 10pts" full stop)?