Comment author: ClaireZabel 06 January 2017 12:45:42AM 11 points [-]

I would prefer if the title of this post was something like "My 5 favorite EA posts of 2016". When I see "best" I expect a more objective and comprehensive ranking system (and think "best" is an irritatingly nonspecific and subjective word), so I think the current wording is misleading.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 06 January 2017 05:53:06PM 3 points [-]

Great idea. Changed the title accordingly.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 28 November 2016 08:32:12PM 4 points [-]

The instances where we have branched out into various media and outreach have proved valuable in driving more people towards the community, e.g. Peter Singer’s TED talk, the Sam Harris podcast with Will MacAskill, EAG, the pledge drive and so on.

The examples here are the best outcomes that were generated by people who spent quite a bit of time developing a following. I don't think they're representative of what media-based outreach looks like on average.

As some useful data points: CEA isn't currently trying to promote EA through media outreach expect in cases where a) the audience is large and promising and b) we have access to a platform that lets us dig into the issues in depth (e.g. podcasts). This is because we've consistently failed to see much of a return from mass-media style stories about EA and are worried about putting EA in front of a large audience where we can't dig into the ideas in depth.

Since I've been at CEA we launched a major media campaign around Will's book with mixed results (unclear if it was worth it) and attempts to promote GWWC through media outreach don't seem to have been particularly successful. This mirrors my experience in my previous job where we worked with multiple outside PR firms on projects with little to show for it.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I'll start things off by putting some of the content I really liked as replies to this post.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:48:12PM 1 point [-]

Will's opening talk from EA Global

Lots of good content here although I'm particularly fond of his discussion of Cause X

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:47:28PM *  0 points [-]

.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I'll start things off by putting some of the content I really liked as replies to this post.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:42:01PM 0 points [-]

Concerns with Intentional Insight

This might not be the best post to share with more casual EAs, but it was extremely well researched and raised an issue that needed to be addressed.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I'll start things off by putting some of the content I really liked as replies to this post.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:38:37PM -2 points [-]

GiveWell's classic April Fools joke

This post was controversial, but I laughed long and hard and really enjoyed seeing a more human side from them.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I'll start things off by putting some of the content I really liked as replies to this post.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:37:35PM 9 points [-]

GiveWell's post on why they recommend SCI even though deworming might have close to zero impact.

I thought this was a really good look at how GiveWell things about expected value with respect to their top charities and helps rebut the claim that EAs are mostly concerned with high certainty charity donations.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I'll start things off by putting some of the content I really liked as replies to this post.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:31:16PM 2 points [-]

Rob Wiblin's post on how much voting matters

The post updated me massively in the direction of voting being extremely important. Plus, if he's right about how much voting matters, the impact of the post is likely to be pretty massive.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I'll start things off by putting some of the content I really liked as replies to this post.

Comment author: MichaelDickens  (EA Profile) 08 November 2016 03:42:49AM 7 points [-]

I believe that when people describe content as "best", what they usually mean is "most fun to read", which is probably not what you want. People naturally like things better when they're fun to read, or when they "feel" insightful. People enjoy reading motivational blogs, even though they're basically useless; people do not enjoy reading statistics textbooks, even though they're extremely useful. I don't believe I personally can do a good job of separating posts/articles that are important to read and ones that I enjoyed reading.

On the other hand, I cannot think of a better strategy for curating good content than asking people to submit the posts they like best. Maybe something like peer review would work better, where you get a small group of people who consciously optimize for finding valuable articles, not necessarily interesting ones?

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 08 November 2016 05:23:21PM 1 point [-]

Agree with this. I'm not yet sure how we'll select the best posts, but I think it will be some combination of votes and talking with experts to distill the content down.

View more: Next