I imagine there could be a useful office in a city with ~20 people using it regularly and ~100 people interested enough in EA to come to some events, and I wouldn't think of that city as an "EA hub".
I also think eg. a London office has much more value than an eg. an Oxford or Cambridge office (although I understand all three to be hubs), even though Oxford and Cambridge have a higher EA-density.
located in an existing hub so that program participants have plenty of people outside the program to interact with
I don't understand this consideration. It seems to me that people located in a place with a more robust existing community are the people that would counterfactually benefit the least from a place to interact with other EAs, because they have plenty of opportunities to do so already.
I'm assuming by "hub" you mean "EA hub", but if by "hub" you mean "a place with high population density/otherwise a lot of people to talk to", then this makes sense.
(Full disclosure: I was a grantee of CEEALAR last year; but I'm thinking about this in the context of non-residential office/co-working spaces like Meridian Office).
Can you say more precisely what it means for a fund to be recommended? For instance, how should a donor compare giving to one of the "recommended funds" to giving to a specific charity or project directly? (and by extension one of GWWC's new funds over a specific charity)
How did you choose the set of evaluators to evaluate -- for instance, why evaluate LTFF and LLF over FP's GCR fund? Were there other evaluators considered for the process but not evaluated?
It's kind of jarring to read that someone has been banned for "violating a norm" - that word to me implies that they're informal agreements between the community. Why not call them "rules"?
tabforacause - a browser extension which shows you ads and directs ad revenue to charity - has launched a way to set GiveDirectly as the charity you want to direct ad revenue to.
It doesn't raise a lot of money per tab opened, obviously, but I'm not using my newtab page for anything else and find the advertising unobtrusive - its in the corner, not taking up the whole screen - if. you're like me in these respects it could be something to add.
Fixed now, thanks for flagging!
How many evaluators typically rate each grant application?
Is there a place to donate to the operations / running of LTFF or the funds in general?
I'd think the article you're referencing (link) basically argues against considering "daode" to mean "morality" and vice-versa. The abstract: "In contemporary Western moral philosophy literature that discusses the Chinese ethical tradition, it is a commonplace practice to use the Chinese term daode 道德 as a technical translation of the English term moral. The present study provides some empirical evidence showing a discrepancy between the terms moral and daode."