I think it would have!

I agree with all these points! I think I under emphasized in my original that I think working with designers is still really valuable, and definitely agree that Claude will make a better website than me by default. I think I just see risks around design going the same way as AI-generated writing, where if it is too obvious, people will just write it off. E.g. when I see a service provider with an AI-generated website, my mind does a slight discounting on them being real/legitimate, because I have a bit less of a sense of a human having done the work to make the thing.

Useful! And to be clear, I think the website looks great and much better than anything I linked - sorry if that didn't come through! I think my point was something like, there are these design trends here that might start to cause people to react negatively to AI-designed stuff, if it is too obvious, in the same way that many people react to obviously negatively to AI writing, so I am much more excited about everyone working with designers who vibe design still, over making their own websites (which is the same pitch you're making!) as I still think designers are adding a very helpful eye.

FWIW, I think there are some comms risks here — I've noticed that Claude sites in particular start looking really same-y without a good design eye editing them. The new User-Friendly site I would have immediately clocked as Claude-made (and applied some automatic discount to it based on this had you not said it, based on things like):

Little glyphs and words above headings

Random italicized words for emphasis

Using 01, 02, 03 in things that don't need numbering, with the leading 0.

Along with the neutral color palette.

Here are some examples of sites that are clearly made by Claude, and have a lot of these features:

• https://guidelight.ai/
• https://www.deploygraph.com/
• https://grassdx.com/

Claude Academy's example websites also look this way: https://academy.claude.com/use-cases/create-a-custom-webpage

I used Claude design with just this prompt: "Can you make me some slides? Don't use my design system - just use whatever you feel like. Fill them in with filler content."

Here are some screenshots of that:

I think that working with a good designer (like you!) seems great for folks doing this, but also, if we're already concerned about EA websites being really same-y, this poses the same kind of risk, or at least for me, as someone who has starting feeling negative about seeing endless amounts of Claude-designed things.

I agree that it is useful! I think it is also just niche to some specific people's needs, and I probably should have just kept it on my Substack (e.g. I like the Forum being about cause prioritization and making the world better, and while starting nonprofits is tangentially related, it isn't really on topic). I think I like the idea of a linkpost sidebar type thing for this sort of content.

Also worth explicitly noting that it seems good that you're posting on the Forum a bunch lately! I think people in leadership roles at organizations engaging with the discourse actively is so good for EA, so thanks for doing that!

I agree about the community drama! I sometimes wonder if the explicit carving out of the community section, while probably good for reducing some kinds of fatigue, also isolated interesting posts that kept people engaged with the Forum.

I'm fairly certain you aren't the common factor :).

I think that I agree — I guess there is some possibility that EA just had way more low hanging fruit in the early days, so it was easier to write pieces that significantly moved discourse forward, or be the first to explicitly state an idea that might look obvious in retrospect, and this was good for conversation.

I similarly think that animal welfare discourse is also not really centralized, and lots of things that are very insidery happens in Google Docs that are just shared around, etc.

Yeah, I've appreciated that you / Lighthaven, etc. have done lots of pushes to get more writing into the world! My impression is that EA Meta funding has focused so heavily on career placements/growth in recent years that ideas like EA Inkhaven have been harder to get off the ground (but do seem really useful).