gwern comments on [LINKS] New GiveWell Top Charities - Less Wrong

22 Post author: jkaufman 29 November 2011 06:40PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (15)

Comments (15)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: gwern 29 November 2011 07:12:31PM 12 points [-]

Their previous top charity, Village Reach, no longer has much room for more funding. Which is a good thing

And implies honesty as well - hard to imagine a charity saying, 'no, we're actually pretty good for funding right now'.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 29 November 2011 07:23:30PM 5 points [-]

Which means that if they do request funding in the future, there's more of a reason to give it to them.

Comment author: jkaufman 29 November 2011 07:23:17PM 5 points [-]

Not necessarily. They were unable to convince givewell they could make comparably effective use of additional money. They make have come out and explicitly said "we're fine for the next year", but I don't see givewell saying they did.

Comment author: gwern 29 November 2011 08:46:34PM 8 points [-]

It sounds like they did:

Note that last year’s top-rated charity, VillageReach, does not have projected short-term funding needs (it expects to be able to meet these needs with funds not driven by GiveWell), as discussed previously.

It expects, not GiveWell expects. But hey, why argue about it? I've just asked.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit