Feel free to take a look at our earlier forum post and our full report about it!

This is such a wonderful opportunity! It's a highly effective way to raise funds and could be one of the simplest ways to spread the word and gather support for your favorite charity.
 

The Humane League.

"Focus on the seeds, not the trees. What seeds are you planting today?"

“You should be far more concerned with your current trajectory than with your current results.”

"If you’re working hard on the right thing, you don’t need to worry about results. The outcome will come. It’s just a matter of time."

- James Clear

Your post captured it. If we're focused on the right thing, all we need is time.

An important topic!
Regarding the Symmetric AI Access and Application, to take advantage of it, I think we should adopt an AI culture, as mentioned by @Richie.

Having a special expert for AI in every organization is not enough. We have to be all AI-positive as team members in our own workplace. We cannot leave it to one person. We cannot throw money at the problem.

And adopting an AI culture as a collective is much harder. As I see it, in academia, where I came from, we cannot tell students, "Here is the most powerful tool we ever had - don't use it."

As for research, one practical recommendation I have is to use tools like Research Kick to find research gaps. You may not know that numerous researchers, including one from NASA, have discovered that AI can conceive of research ideas that took them years to develop on their own in just minutes. We have to not let our egos prevent us from being effective.

But it happens outside of academia, too (not where I am positioned, luckily). Using AI is seen as cheating. However, it is not cheating if you use it to deliver better results and utilize your own intelligence to accomplish tasks that AI cannot yet do during the rest of your time.

We should be lifelong learners, especially when it comes to new AI tools. I personally learn about new AI platforms every day from YouTube on the go. The AI gap is only widening between the profit and nonprofit sectors, as Kyle Behrend says. Speaking of symmetries and asymmetries, we aim to prevent an asymmetric disadvantage as nonprofits adopt AI.

Great, I wish I had it a long time ago! I created an account and a NotebookLM episode about it.

I know we're all rational people here, but I would suggest adding an option for users to customize their profile picture, background image, and QR code.

We want people to include this on their websites, and many would prefer it to be visually appealing.

As someone in the behavioral science field, I believe these features have a disproportionately influential impact.

Additionally, perhaps adding a web carousel on the main website that showcases specific use cases for requesting donations, rather than limiting this information to the newsletter.

Otherwise, a very user-friendly, simplicity-driven, convenience-first website!

Thanks for brainstorming our comparative advantage!
I think it all depends on whether we're wise enough to leverage it:

Motivational asymmetry - we need to care enough and encourage others to prioritize it over other priorities. The animal industry has the money, so we need to be equally attractive.

Truth asymmetry - we need to make people care about the truth.

Efficiency asymmetry - agreed.

Agility asymmetry - agreed.

Ceiling asymmetry - you can equally say that the animal-based agriculture already has the resources and experience using them, which is an advantage to the other side.

Cooperation asymmetry - if we're smart enough to overcome infighting.

So, I think that all of these can be our comparative advantage - but only if we seize the opportunity.

Defaults make a difference. I submitted my form based on your post, and I wanted to say thank you for bringing it to our attention!

By the way, you might want to connect with Robbie Lockie. He's created an AI tool specifically designed to enhance the form-filling experience, helping to send a pre-filled yet personalized message when sending feedback, petitions, and similar communications. It could be worth reaching out to see if there's potential to integrate with his AI solution.

Hey @Maxtandy, thanks for the kind words and for your insightful questions!
You're right, it's important to be transparent about the data.

To answer your questions: 
Participants: The 70,000 engagements refer to the total number of interactions (likes, comments, shares) across all our platforms. The 600+ daily check-ins are from our WeChat Mini Program, which is a separate platform used for tracking individual participation.

Reach: The 7 million people reached refers to the estimated number of individuals who saw our campaign materials across various platforms. This includes social media posts, ads, and media coverage. 

Follow-through: You're right, the follow-through rate is lower than we'd like, but it's still a significant number of people making changes to their diet.

Non-binary: It's great to see such a high representation of non-binary individuals in our campaign. It's possible that there's a selection effect, as you mentioned, and individuals who are open to plant-based diets are also more likely to be open to diverse identities. 

Tree planting: We partnered with the Alashan SEE Ecology Association because we believe that addressing climate change is vital.

Thanks again for your interest and for engaging in this vital conversation!

I would really love to see the Good Food Institute (GFI) included on the list as well!