This seems like an impressive set of capabilities, exciting to hear about the new org :)

Did CSER write more about your work for them anywhere? Interested to read more about it.

Yeah sorry I didn't intend to disagree with you on whether it was a management dispute or an ethics dispute, just that it wasn't only the issue you explicitly named.

on its own quick takes? controllable by anyone? or do you authorise it to post on your own quick takes?

(full disclosure, I don't personally use twitter so I doubt I'll do this, but maybe it's useful to you to clarify)

L/acc, who think that LEEP have gone too far

This sounds like it's disagreeing with the parent comment but I'm not sure if it is?

Thanks for the link! I'm sure there's a tonne of existing work in this area, and haven't really evaluated to what extent this is already covered by it.

I don't think the EA movement as a whole can sensibly be assigned a scope, really. But I think we should collectively be open to doing whatever reasonably practicable, ethical things seem most important, without restricting ourselves to only certain kinds of behaviour fitting that description.

Do you have a call to action here? Are you expecting that someone reading this on the forum has any ability to make it more (or less) likely to happen?

I broadly think it's cool to be raising novel (to me) possibilities like this, and I think you've done a good job of illustrating that it's not obviously out of line with existing practice. Thanks for writing it!

Minor formatting / typographical things: I think the image is misplaced from where the text refers to it. Also, weirdly, a lot of the single quotation marks in the text are duplicated?

I think this was an example of a disagreement they had, but not the whole disagreement. (Another alleged example was the thing where Tara didn't want Sam to run some trading algorithm unattended, which he agreed to and then did anyway.)