Nick Bostrom's involvement is one of my greatest causes for hope for the department. If someone like him isn't involved, I expect the department to do almost no genuinely useful work, because it will be another standard department whose output can be predicted by, as Eliezer puts it, the simple model of a dumb amoeba attracted toward status and funding and no other considerations.
Not only can your comment be perceived to state that the other people involved in the project are mainly interested in status but also that they are selfish and incompetent. One reason for that impression are the connotations of a "dumb amoeba" that you mention. Your remark that without Nick Bostrom you expect them to do almost no genuinely useful work further adds to the overall negative perception.
You further miss the importance of status and public relations when it comes to raising awareness of existential risks and in arguing with policy makers.
Luke's comment talks about "someone like [Bostrom]", not "Bostrom".
CSER at Cambridge University joins the others.
Good people involved so far, but the expected output depends hugely on who they pick to run the thing.