Finally, some quantitative analysis to confirm a nagging suspicion I've had, but have been unable to prove: Vasco likes to write about soil nematodes <3 

Good question! I think (a) having to think about which is the 10% and “should I eat this” every meal uses too much bandwidth. I find a simple rule easier overall. It’s kind of like how I don’t calculate the consequences of my actions at every decision even though I’m consequentialist. I rely on heuristics instead. (b) I found it really hard to get to my current diet. It took me many years. And I think that personally I’ll find it hard to re-introduce 10% of the animal products without being tempted and it becoming 50%. (c) I think the things I say about veganism to other vegans / animal people are more credible when I’m vegan [as I’m clearly committed to the cause and not making excuses for myself].

This couldn't be more salient for my partner and me, literally trying to decide between staying indefinitely in London and returning to Australia, with kids and aging parents being key considerations. We've been staring the abyss dead in the eye and it's not backing down! :S

They're probably less judgmental than average. Also perhaps poorer social skills on average. Do I back us to have the required tact? :P

But in all seriousness, the answer to "is it positive for social signalling to have an extra vegan EA forum reader" could defs be different to "is it positive for social signalling to have an extra vegan". I had the latter in mind when I questioned the signalling value

To be clear, I want to see factory farming ended, I’m vegan (except occasional bivalves), and co-founded an animal welfare charity. 

I’m with you on the goal. 

But while all the vegans I know seem to take it as self-evident that being vegan is the best diet choice in terms of social signalling, I’m not convinced.

You’re right that it’s possible to be a non-judgmental strict vegan, and everyone should aspire to be. But in my experience, the average vegan doesn’t meet this standard. And so rather than assuming a marginal vegan will be the best case scenario, I assume they’ll be average, and I think that could be negative.

[Of course, I don’t have good data on how judgmentally the average vegan behaves — but neither do the people who assume they’re positive signaling value. It’s also likely that my and most people’s perceptions of vegans is skewed by a vocal minority. But the result is that omnivores are often very defensive around vegans, even when the vegan isn’t being judgmental and is just silently being a strict vegan. I suspect that for someone to know that you’re a strict vegan and not feel judged would require you to actively demonstrate to them that you don’t judge them. And that’s actually quite hard to do]I’m 

What are transaction fees? If sufficiently low, this could enable some use cases I’ve had personally where I want to, for example, donate $2 to charity at the click of a button every time I’m begged for change, or if I find myself somewhere remote and unable to access vegan food or something 

This! I think an important way this posts’ recommendation can backfire is if non-drinkers become like vegans: socially isolated from drinkers, judgmental of drinkers.. this will likely be counterproductive and knowing human nature, I think people are  at significant risk of becoming socially isolated from drinkers if they quit.

My guess is that the signaling value of 2 people halving their drinking is higher than the signaling value of 1 person quitting 

I agree that removing the 10% of animal products from your diet that causes the least suffering is not that important, and otherwise clear-headed EAs treat it like a very big deal in a way they don’t treat giving 10% less to charity as a very big deal (even though it only takes small amounts of base giving for the latter to be a far bigger deal). There is a puritanical attitude to diet that is surprisingly pervasive on the forum which I think is counter-productive.

Another commenter (Tristan) is right to point to other and second-order benefits of veganism, but some of the common ones I hear I don’t find persuasive. For example, it’s not clear to me whether the signaling value of being 100% vegan and strict about it (which many people now pattern match with being shrill and judgmental) is positive, or at least more positive than being 90% vegan (signaling that change doesn’t have to be all or nothing, that taking intermediate first steps is good etc.)

But this post’s title that ‘you SHOULD eat meat if you hate factory farming’ goes too far. I don’t find the case compelling. So upvoting and disagreeing :)

You might like this diet offset calculator, Kat: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Bc6E6AeWesmeobeKq/beyond-go-vegan-a-video-introducing-omnivores-to-another

I totally relate with the emotional difficulty of putting aside feelings about others harming animals in order to best enable them to make the world better, in whatever ways are both realistic and most impactful for them. It’s hard! But I think it’s really important and I think is making me a more effective advocate within my real-world social interactions