Does Jesse have an EA Forum account? We can manually add them as a co-author — feel free to contact us with Jesse's account info. :)

Appreciate the response! To be clear, I am genuinely glad that you wrote the quick take, so I don't want to discourage you from doing more off-the-cuff quick takes in the future. Hopefully hearing my perspective was helpful as well. I'm glad to hear that you don't think we are actually fighting. :)

On collaborating/cutting costs: my outside impression is that AIM is already quite good about keeping their costs low and is not shy about being proactive. So my view is something like, if they thought it would be good for the world to collaborate more closely with CEA, I trust that they would have acted upon that belief. This is something that I respect about AIM (at least the version that's in my head, since I don't know them). 

Thank you for sharing this Timothy. I left a long comment on the LW version of the post. I'm happy to talk about this more with you or Elizabeth — if you're interested, you're welcome to reach out to me directly.

I agree that it's useful to make this more visible here, thank you!

[Flagging that I only know my own very limited perspective, and I don't expect that Lincoln has done anything wrong, it's just that I don't see much from where I'm sitting] I found that statement a bit confusing, because as a person who works at CEA, I barely knew that Lincoln was on the EV board, and I have never heard about him interacting with anyone at CEA (though it seems likely that he has done this and I just don't know about it). I feel like this is complicated because I don't know what the best practices are wrt how involved a board member should be in the details of the organization; I could imagine there might be good reason for board members not to be reaching out to individual employees and pushing their pet causes. But he specifically said he was "worried about the EA Forum" in his comment, and yet I do not know what any of his views on the Forum are, and I have never heard of him sharing any of his views on the Forum with anyone on the CEA Online Team. So I am left feeling pretty confused. I'll just say that I have directly reached out and offered to talk with him, because as you can imagine, I am very interested in understanding what his concerns are.

I work for CEA but I'm writing this from a personal perspective. Others at CEA may disagree with me.

Thanks for writing this! :) I think it's an interesting argument. I generally agree with everything @Lorenzo Buonanno🔸 said in his comments, so I'll just add a few things here.

I ultimately disagree that CEA should change its name, because EA principles are important to me and I like that we are trying to do good explicitly using the framework of EA (including promoting the framework itself) rather than using a more nebulous framing. I can't speak for AIM, but it does seem like our two organizations have different goals, so in that sense it seems good that we both exist and work towards achieving our own separate goals. For example, I think (just a low confidence guess based on public info) that AIM are not interested in stewarding EA or owning improving the EA brand. CEA is interested in doing those things, and it seems good for us to have "EA" in our name in order to do those things. I think you and I both agree that the EA brand needs improving, and CEA is working on hiring for our Comms Team to have more capacity to do this work.

I think they have more in common than they think and are focussing too much on where they differ.

I'm not sure who "they" are in this sentence. I personally don't think I have done this. I have a very high opinion of AIM overall, and I think that sentiment is common within CEA. I have personally applied to one of their incubation rounds because I thought there was a chance I could do more good there than at CEA. They are one of the orgs that best takes advantage of CEA's infrastructure (such as EAG and the EA Forum) — they make frequent appearances in our user surveys about how people have found value from those projects. Our team includes AIM's opportunities in our email newsletters and have curated multiple posts by them. I don't personally know the people who run AIM, but from my perspective we are collaborators on the same team.

Looking at where CEA people actually donate, it looks like they are hedging the higher risk nature of their work with donations to interventions with clearer returns.

I think it's hard to use the linked post as evidence to support this. I counted ~4/10 of the CEA employees that responded as falling into that category, and the rest mostly donated to causes that I think you would consider more speculative (at least more than the average AIM charity). Most CEA employees decided not participate in the public post, and I'm guessing that the ones that did not are more biased towards donating to less legibly cost-effective projects. I think there is also a bit of a theme where people tended to donate to interventions with clearer returns before joining CEA, and at CEA are spending more time considering other donation options (this is broadly true for myself, for example). So there are forces that push in both directions and it's not clear to me what the net result is.

We shouldn't be internally fighting for a bigger slide of the existing pie, we should be demonstrating value externally so we can grow the size of the pie.

Again, I'm not sure who is fighting internally. I guess this is making me worried that AIM views us as fighting with each other? That possibility makes me genuinely quite sad. If anyone at AIM wants to talk with me about it, you're welcome to message me on the Forum. 

(BTW, Ollie and Will fixed this on Friday, so it should now be working for comments)

Ah thanks for clarifying! Now I see what you mean. Yeah I think that has been an issue with the karma notification system for a while, and we didn't fix it when we updated the UI. I do think getting notifications right is pretty important, so I'll plan on getting our team to look into this issue.

Oh gosh, do you mean that literally they no longer appear in the list in the dropdown? Or do you mean that you perceive it that way because all the notifications get marked as read when you open the dropdown?

I would love to hear more thoughts from others as well, about what specific things about notifications they find frustrating about the current setup, or examples of sites that do notifications particularly well.

Personally, I think the most important advantage is discoverability. This is related to Will's first point around making it easier to view past editions, but also I think it would be easier to find via search engines and easier for readers to share individual editions with others.

Yeah I agree and I noticed that too - I posted about it in slack so if it's easy to add it should be done soon. :)