They are already getting some critical feedback.

I think I made much the same points in my DOOM! video. DOOM mongers:

• tend to do things like write books about THE END OF THE WORLD - which gives them a stake in promoting the topic ...and...

• are a self-selected sample of those who think DOOM is very important (and so, often, highly likely) - so naturally they hold extreme views - and represent a sample from the far end of the spectrum;

• clump together, cite each others papers, and enjoy a sense of community based around their unusual views.

It seems tricky for the SIAI to avoid the criticism that they have a stake in promoting the idea of DOOM - while they are funded the way they are.

Similarly, I don't see an easy way of avoiding the criticism that they are a self-selected sample from the extreme end of a spectrum of DOOM beliefs either.

If we could independently establish p(DOOM), that would help - but measuring it seems pretty challenging.

IMO, a prize wouldn't help much - but I don't know for sure. Many people behave irrationally around prizes - so it is hard to be very confident here.

I gather they are working on publishing some positional documents. It seems to be a not-unreasonable move. If there is something concrete to criticise, critics will have something to get their teeth into.