Interesting. Could you point to anyone in EA who does not agree with the additive view and works in this field?

I agree with you, as do most people outside of EA, but I believe almost everyone in EA working on these topics disagrees

simulating the same wonderful experience a billion times certainly isn't a billion times greater than simulating it once

My sense is that most people in EA working on these topics disagree.

See also https://www.alignmentforum.org/w/super-beneficiaries which seems really similar to this post

Google Docs natively supports exporting, importing, copying and pasting as Markdown

Use Markdown in Google Docs, Slides, & Drawings - Google Docs Editors Help https://support.google.com/docs/answer/12014036?hl=en#zippy=%2Cexport-a-google-doc-as-markdown 

I think many people following effective altruism principles are focusing on politics, but don't write it in places like the EA forum, because the EA brand is toxic in many circles, and/or has a significant chance of becoming toxic in the future.

See e.g. NIST staffers revolt against expected appointment of ‘effective altruist’ AI researcher to US AI Safety Institute

While both are rich by global standards, someone in the top 10% ($20k/year) and someone in the top 1% (>$60k/year) have very different abilities to donate.

This becomes even more noticeable as relatively less rich people also often have to support their families, pay off debts, and can't rely on a future inheritance.

ETA: One org used to ask something like: "if you earned $50k, how much would you donate and why?" which imho mitigates this (although not perfectly)

Do you have a sense of how important Hanania's support was for the post going viral?

It would make me update on the value of being more iclusive towards people who have very different beliefs which seem incompatible with altruism.

And the amount spent in ads, I think X ads to promote EAG might be a new thing

I think using an anonymous account helps a bit with that, especially when writing praise feels cringy