= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on Efficient Charity - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (182)
Is GiveWell a "good" charity? Have they assessed themselves?
It looks like they have evaluated themselves.
I'm not surprised they would do that. They are the canonical example of a ridiculously transparent organization. For instance, their admission of their own mistakes and shortcomings is heroically vigorous.
I searched for "metafilter" and was disappointed, then looked closer and realized the incident actually was mentioned, under "overaggressive and inappropriate marketing". Huh.
Löb's Theorem! Trust GiveWell because you evaluate it as trustworthy; not because it has evaluated itself!
That reduces self-evaluation to signalling. I suppose you could factor "they costly signal transparency" into your evaluation of GiveWell.
edit: Having read about their disciplinary action, I would like to revise my previous statement to "they extremely costly signal transparency"
If they have would there be much point in having made the assessment public?