Thank you for your comment :)

It looks like Lennart Stern has been working on a project related to "international cooperation", "prize and market design" and "preparedness in developing countries"

I don't know about anything else, but I haven't looked much.

I also want to make sure we still value the community members who don’t change their minds because of what’s trending in EA, and who still hold the values that we thought were good values 10 years ago and are likely still good values today.

I strongly agree with this!

It's ok to leave EA, but I really hope these community members feel welcome to stay here. Just donating to GiveWell charities is still effective altruism. "Big tent" effective altruism is very important (particularly right now).

I think this was actually mentioned in the original post :

"no one knows how to pronounce the acronym PISE (to rhyme with mice, if you’re interested) and without the ‘Erasmus’ part the acronym spells PIS… yep."

I read your first post on name change last year, during the first handover of EA Ensae. Together with the new organisers, we were very influenced by it. After getting feedback on the EA groups slack, we decided to adopt a nickname, "Altef", and to keep "Altruisme Efficace Ensae" as a complete long name / subtitle. The nickname is used in informal conversations, group chat names, and in the logo.

It seems to me that for this particular group, it struck the right balance between the advantages and disadvantages you mentioned. So thank you for writing these two posts!

We sadly don't have the same kind of great quantitative feedback to share at the moment, but we might in the future, who knows 🙂

I would consider just buying/taking over and promoting creating accounts [on EA hub]. Treating it like LinkedIn for EAs.

This is also what I think would be the best option. I like that EA hub and the Forum are two separate things, because they have different functions.

EA hub feels much more friendly to me, probably because of pictures, control over profile visibility, and how the profiles are conceived.

I feel quite intimidated on the Forum because of how serious and public it is.

I've tried extending Martin and Pindyck 2015 too, and it feels reassuring to know others have failed at this before me :)

A list of “common EA econ theorist dead ends” sounds very interesting.

Thank you for your comment!

To represent that, you would basically need to create a curve (probability X impact distribution) for each event instead of a rectangle.

Yes! This is actually the third open question at the end of the post. I'd be very curious to see such a curve, if anyone wants to make one.

I really like your second point, and wonder how the interactive effects you mention could be represented graphically.

The quality of this conversation is awesome!

I think Probably good is a great name. What are some other good names you have considered so far? Does anyone have alternative ideas ?

My first understanding of the name was something like "this is a website that will help me have a career that will probably have a good impact", where probably meant something like ~70%-ish. I thought this wasn’t very ambitious, but it also had something intriguing, so I felt curious to learn more.

I’d like my career to be (almost) guaranteed to have some good consequences. I think my odds of doing some good with my career if EA didn’t exist at all would be above 95%. (As many people interested in EA, I already wanted to do good when I discovered the movement.)

So I’d be even more interested in a website which can probably help me do even better than I would have done without its advice.

I’m not sure that “Probably better” would be a better name than “Probably good”. I feel like it preserves the modesty and the catchiness, while also making it sound a little more ambitious. It could also be in line with your experimental approach, trying to make the quality your advice better as you gain experience.

What do you think ? :)