Ok I almost see that (downgraded to weak downvot) I think I see this post as being about their overall process rather than details. There's not one number in this post so they don't seem to be engaging on that level

If this was a post was about the details of their methodology then I think getting into the details you mention would make more sens.

Strong downvote again for not engaging with the substance/purpose of the post (telling us about the great charities they are reviewing), and instead bringing in a sideline discussion about nematode/wild animal welfare. 

This is true, and I've appreciated it personally. I've been pleasantly surprised how people have responded to a couple of things I've written, even when they didn't know me from a bar of soap. I think this was unlikely to happen in academia or in the high brow public health world where status games often prevail like you said.

There is still though an element of being "known" which helps your ideas get traction. This does make sense as if someone has written something decent in the past, there's a higher chance that other things they write may also be decent, so we are more likely to give their next idea a read. This is why we follow certain people on Substack and Twitter and don't just read things at random (to state the obvious).

So I think there can still a hill to climb a the beginning to get good ideas seen, especially for very new people. 

I think 1-2 years is a reasonable window to test for 1 year of funding. I think some benefits of the grant would remain beyond that, but only a small percentage. Direct networking, marketing, website improvement etc. need people working directly to increase funding and I struggle to see how those benefits would persist if no-one was working and the money stopped?

How do you imagine the benefits might continue past 2 years?

This makes straightforward sense to me, and I love the diversity of funding here - from Instagram influencer to the most traditional charity evaluator!

Will be interested to see how these orgs manage over the next couple of years - although with fundraising I would imagine there is a lot of circumstance and luck involved as well, it would be possible to work hard and make the right moves sometimes without much success.

I know this isn't the point of the post, but to add New Zealand is objectively the most beautiful country in the world, and no-one has ever disagreed with me. Before I moved to Uganda, my home in Christchurch was 20 minutes to the beach, and one hour to snow capped hills where one could wander for days and never see another human.

I assume Godzone is just as incredible 12 years later.

#Justsayin #Soldiermindset

I find stalking people online for 2-5 minutes can often garner a lot of this information - I try to do it before a 1 on 1. Badge idea pretty cool though, although would take some serious squinting/staring with the text that small :D :D :D 

Loved seeing this talk and am looking forward to showing it to a few others as well! 

Side note it would be great if all the talks were on YouTube publicly ASAP. Good to be able to ride on that post - conference buzz before it dies down ;)

People I know who In my opinion have "drifted" (quite a lot of people) are generally unaware of what's happened as it all happens so slowly and "normal" life takes over, or if they are aware they don't really want to talk about it much. My experience though is from community advocacy/social justice circles in my early 20s (I'm now 38), not from EA circles. 

I've strong downvoted not because I believe @Vasco Grilo🔸 doesn't have a decent argument, but because I think posting "what about the downstream effect of x" as a reply on every thread is often counterproductive to the core discussion that poster's are trying trying to have.

Even more so because @Vasco Grilo's opinion on farmed animal welfare has changed in the last ?6 months or so - before that he would have pushed in the other direction. I think its great to have these well thought out opinions and discuss them as distinct post (as Vasco does), but I don't think dropping the meat eating problem/nematode effect on a lot of human and animal welfare threads is helpful.

Otherwise every discussion risks descending into a discussion about moral weights, or the effect of every single intervention on nematodes.