https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/HDXLTFnSndhpLj2XZ/i-m-leaving-ai-alignment-you-better-stay is relevant to how independent research attempts could be improved. I describe my attempt at independent AI alignment research and how I could have done better. It applies to other fields, too.
It's better if potential donors are persuaded by content, not by form, ie. choice of words.
Regarding the lawyer: Perhaps I have a wrong idea both about the legal nature of the document and about what a lawyer does. But yes, in my imagination a lawyer is able to advise you on how to formulate a policy clearly and remove vagueness. So I might go to the lawyer and ask: ‘If this were to be legally binding, how would we have to write it?’
My imagination might be wrong, though – I haven't dealt with lawyers much.
Sufficient causes for recusal of a fund member: Applicant is a close family member, or is/was a romantic/sexual partner within the last year.
Not sufficient for recusal, but should be made public: Intimate relationship that lasted longer than two weeks and ended more than a
Who would get to see this policy statement? If I imagine myself in the shoes of a more conservative potential donor, who is checking the fine print as part of their due diligence, I would be put off by phrases like ‘metamour’, ‘consumption of drugs’ and the repeated mentioning of sexual relationships.
If I imagine myself in the shoes of a more conservative potential donor, who is checking the fine print as part of their due diligence, I would be put off by phrases like ‘metamour’, ‘consumption of drugs’ and the repeated mentioning of sexual relationships.
The purpose of disclosure is to provide potential donors with information they consider relevant to their decision process. That some of donors will be persuaded not to donate by the information is a feature, not a bug.
Wanted to +1 this in general although I haven't thought through exactly where I think the tradeoff should be.
My best guess is that the official policy should be a bit closer to the level of detail GiveWell uses to describe their policy than to the level of detail you're currently using. If you wanted to elaborate, one possibility might be to give some examples of how you might respond to different situations in an EA Forum post separate from the official policy.
Thanks for your comment on my article! I appreciate your thoughts and have left a lengthy answer.
I've written on LessWrong about a fairly airtight approach to psychosomatic wrist pain: A cognitive intervention for wrist pain
And I think it's important that every article writing about physical causes and interventions also contain a section about psychosomatics. Because the people prone to psychosomatic wrist pain might read the warnings of permanent physical damage and disability, and enter a vicious circle of worrying leading to pain leading to more worrying. This is how it was for me, as I describe in the article.