Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 18 November 2017 09:30:04AM 3 points [-]

Just want to say I value that this topic is now openly discussed and considered. A few 'bad apples' (or to put it in more nuanced terms, people who're trying to get their sexual desires/needs met without considering the needs and feelings of the other person enough) in our community can kill off the open, supportive and trusting atmosphere I often experience myself.

An intuition I wanted to bring up: if we'd slam down too hard on the topic of rape, this might create a taboo the other way where it's hard to discuss a possible incident with someone who instigated it because of the shame and social punishment associated with that.

I don't have much experience here but here's a thought: many milder forms of harassment in the EA could plausibly arise from males having poor social awareness and encountering difficulty and frustration trying to date one of a few girls they come into contact with (this seems the most common case to me but there are others as you mentioned).

Setting out 'bright line' rules would still help them gauge when they're going to far. However, this is only one tool, and a rather crude one at that (since it reacts to incidents on the extreme end of the spectrum as they happen, rather than prevention on the lower end).

Personally, I want to work on empowering fellow men to be more emotionally involved and understanding and to seek out and build healthy relationships (such as by hosting circling sessions and practicing non-violent communication together).

Noting that I've scanned through your post and haven't gone through your arguments extensively enough.

Comment author: EschersDemon 04 November 2017 07:41:54PM 3 points [-]

Thanks a lot guys. I'm starting to understand the value of all this information for other organizers (like myself).

Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 06 November 2017 03:41:32PM 0 points [-]

Thanks for letting us know. I'm glad to hear that long write-ups like this one can give useful insights to other organisers.


Reflections on community building in the Netherlands

Authors : Remmelt Ellen and Sjir Hoeijmakers Here, we share our key lessons since launching the community-building organisation Effective Altruism Netherlands this year, as well as our plans for 2018. We want your feedback: both in the comments below and if you see us at EAG London. Below, we have... Read More
Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 20 October 2017 08:05:40PM *  1 point [-]

Love it. You've made an offer that's hard to refuse.

Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 18 September 2017 03:38:47AM 1 point [-]

Update: this series is going to take months – not weeks – to finish.

After further reflection, I'm doing another major overhaul of my draft. I've also had to commit to doing more other work than in the last month than expected.

(In other words: planning fallacy.)

Comment author: jayquigley 11 August 2017 10:07:10PM 2 points [-]

If BCA were a major animal protection organization such as HSUS or PETA, I would mostly agree with you. But we are an all-volunteer force of around 4 dedicated members in one of the very most progressive cities in the U.S. What we should prioritize is not the building of awareness but rather the accumulation of inspiring legislative victories which will help mobilize the rest of those who are already aware of animal issues.

Rather than "run[ning] around and try[ing] to do something about every incidence of suffering [we] see", we are prioritizing attainable, potentially replicable, key legislative victories.

Incidentally, we've begun to think that if we run out of such potential initiatives, we should switch focus to educating local progressive political leaders about farmed animal issues.

Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 12 August 2017 09:40:09AM 0 points [-]

Fair point. You seem to be opening up the way to show what's possible to larger organisations.

Having said that, can't you connect these two? Can't you one one end take practical steps to showing that real legal progress is possible while at the other end show the big picture that you're working towards and why?

Thinking big around a shared goal could the increase cohesion and ambition of the idealistic people you're connected with and work with on each new project from now on (this reminds me of Elon Musk's leadership approach, who unfortunately doesn't seem to care much about animal issues).

Comment author: jayquigley 09 August 2017 04:38:15AM *  4 points [-]

Speaking specifically for Fur Free Berkeley, and speculating on behalf of Fur Free West Hollywood, the reasons for focusing on banning fur were that it was:

  • attainable yet challenging

  • a meaningful step in an incremental progression toward further, more all-encompassing reforms

  • a farmed animal issue with which the general public has substantial sympathy

  • an industry wherein welfare misdeeds are egregious and relatively well-understood

  • an issue on which both welfare reformers and staunch abolitionists can agree (because it is a form of outright prohibition rather than welfare-oriented reform)

  • a form of animal farming that people can thoroughly sympathize with, encouraging further sympathies with other varieties of farmed animals, including the massive classes of individuals you mention

Specifically in the case of going for a second ban, there were additional advantages:

  • The legal language was already formulated

  • The WeHo law had already been successfully defended in federal court

As for the reasoning process for pursuing a given item, our unofficial criteria tend to be related to attainability (especially, in talking with legislators, do they feel excited enough about an idea to sponsor the item), defensibility (how worried would the bill's backer be about backlash), and momentum for the broader animal advocacy movement.

We do have further legislation ideas, some of which would make Berkeley the first to accomplish a particular feat. While we're not ready to announce anything yet, you can stay tuned on what we're up to by following us on Facebook:

Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 11 August 2017 04:57:18PM 1 point [-]

Thanks for the explanation for your decision to focus on fur at this point.

a form of animal farming that people can thoroughly sympathize with, encouraging further sympathies with other varieties of farmed animals, including the massive classes of individuals you mention

I'm curious – if you see this particular ban as a stepping stone to larger behavioural change in the state of California – how are you using your success here as leverage to make citizens become aware of the suffering happening on a much larger scale in intensive factory farms?

I saw this article on extending your progress to other animals. But, to be fair, it isn't clear to me yet how you're prioritising these areas.

In the Netherlands, I have seen a tendency amongst animal welfare charities to run around and try to do something about every incidence of suffering they see. While I understand this and admire these efforts, I try to bring across to them that becoming really good at one or two areas would make them capable of helping more animals overall, even by virtue of specialisation.

Comment author: Vincent-Soderberg 14 July 2017 04:14:20PM 1 point [-]

suggestion for possible low hanging fruit: getting DGB, The life you can save, and 80k into all the libraries in netherlands. Im constantly surprised how few libraries have the books in sweden, and the benefit of it is that once you get it in, at least a few people will read it, and it gets easier for a potental EA to get into EA if there is good reading material in their vicinity. thats my idea at least

other then that, i'll be going to Fest i Nord (a mormon convent), and i'll likely meet someone from netherlands. I'll be sure to mention the EAN to them!

Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 11 August 2017 01:18:04PM *  0 points [-]

I had missed your comment, Vincent, so here's a late reply. :-)

I like your idea of distributing introductory books to EA through libraries (especially university colleges, where students seem more multidisciplinary and idealistic). Last May, we actually collaborated with a publisher to get a new translated book of Peter Singer out.

Here's the deal. From my perspective, it will probably take too much time and attention away from EAN to directly work on distributing the books. Our current strategy for representing EA publicly in the Netherlands is to do it in limited, low marginal cost ways – through our online channels and invitations from media or lecture platforms (this falls under strategy point 4: EA-related in the Netherlands).

I think we should aim to become extremely competent by specialising in these approaches, which also means not getting distracted by other outreach opportunities (unless focusing on one of those instead will contribute more to building a thriving EA community).

To explore this concept more deeply:

People tend to naturally specialise in economic markets. This seems more difficult in the EA community because in a transaction, a product (information, skills, and other forms of capital) is often not offered in return for currency units (a medium of exchange) but instead in the expectation of reciprocity (that the other party is 1. aligned enough with your consequentialist preferences and 2. capable of fulfilling these moral preferences sufficiently using what you give them). It's not even barter (the exchange of products as would be done in moral trade, i.e. where moral preferences diverge) but the formation of trust-based partnerships towards shared long-term goals.

My hope (and what we're testing) is that collaborating on building a fractal social network structure – with EAs clustering around different adaptable network targets with corresponding specialised expertise at each layer – would result in a more optimal division of labour.

So should a competent organiser in the Netherlands reach out to us wanting to build an 'EA Literature network', we'd be open to exploring this!

Comment author: remmelt  (EA Profile) 06 August 2017 01:55:44PM *  6 points [-]

This looks like a well-structured analysis. My respect for the successful lobby work in California. I was curious how you would place interventions on helping fur-bearing animals in an overall strategy to reduce the most animal suffering.

It makes intuitive sense to me that these animals (as well as dogs traded for meat) live decidedly miserable lives. The case made by organisations like Animal Charity Evaluators though is that the suffering of livestock animals like broiler chickens should be prioritised because they occur on a massive scale and tend to get even less attention from people.

As a quick comparison, each year roughly 25 million dogs are killed for food worldwide, 100 million animals for their fur, compared to about 53 billion chickens (at least 500x as much).

What are your views on this? How much is the strong statement that banning fur makes against speciesism part of Berkeley Coalition for Animals' strategy? How do you think to continue from here? I'm generally curious here to learn about your organisation's reasoning process for concentrating on a specific area.


Effective Altruism as a Market in Moral Goods – Introduction

This is post 1 of a 5-part series, where I tentatively apply the market and network concepts in the table below (links to definitions/examples) to hopefully gain a better applied understanding of how the EA community operates. I welcome your feedback in the comments section throughout.   1) Introduction 2)... Read More

View more: Next