peter_hurford comments on What has .impact done so far? - Less Wrong

7 Post author: peter_hurford 31 March 2014 05:50PM

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

Comments (22)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: mbitton24 01 April 2014 10:03:42PM -1 points [-]

"A stronger community for the effective altruist movement should better encourage existing EAs to contribute more and better attract new people to consider becoming EA. By building the EA Community, we hope to indirectly improve recruitment and retention in the effective altruist movement, which in turn indirectly results in more total altruistic effort, in turn resulting in more reduced suffering and increased happiness."

I'm going to predict that .impact struggles to meet this objective.

I think you're taking a naive view of how movement building works.

I think you need to see the distinction between retaining and recruiting members as analogous to the tension between a core and casual fan base. In order to recruit new EAs, your pitch will almost definitely have to downplay certain areas that many core EAs spend lots of time thinking about. That way, you'll bring in a lot of new people that, for example, buy the argument that you should donate to the charity that provides the most bang for your buck and yet still, for example, have zero interest in AI or animals. If you refuse to alienate core EA member values in order to get more casual EAs (e.g. people that donate to GiveWell's top charities and give a bit more than average) then, well, that's admirable, I guess, but you're movement building won't go anywhere. There's a reason why for-profit organizations do this - it actually works.

The amount of people that share most EA values is going to remain low for a very long time. Increasing that number wouldn't involve "recruitment" as much as it would involve full-on conversion. As long as your goal is to increase that number, you're going to see very low recruitment rates. Most people aren't on the market shopping for new worldviews - but individual new beliefs or values, maybe. And if you won't agree with a worldview, you aren't going to join the community just because it's active.

If you want more "total altruistic effort," go convince people to show more altruistic effort. Trying to movement build a group as complex and alienating as EA by strengthening its internal ties will dissuade most outsiders from wanting to join you. Pre-existing communities can be scary things to self-identify with.

You know how some parents make their kids try cigarettes at a young age so that they'll hate it and then not want to smoke when they're older? Well, a website like Brian Tomasik's is like that for most potential EAs. Way too much, too soon.

Comment author: peter_hurford 02 April 2014 03:12:08AM 2 points [-]

In order to recruit new EAs, your pitch will almost definitely have to downplay certain areas that many core EAs spend lots of time thinking about.

I think "core" EAs understand and are comfortable with that, so they won't feel alienated.

-

As long as your goal is to increase that number [of core EAs], you're going to see very low recruitment rates.

Some of this comes down to what counts as an "EA". What kind of conversion do we need to do, and how much? I also think I'll be pretty unsuccessful at getting new core EAs, but what can I get? How hard is it? These are things I'd like to know, and things I believe would be valuable to know.

-

If you want more "total altruistic effort," go convince people to show more altruistic effort.

So you expect movement building / outreach to be a lot less successful than community building ("inreach", if you will)?

Comment author: mbitton24 02 April 2014 02:26:52PM -2 points [-]

So you expect movement building / outreach to be a lot less successful than community building ("inreach", if you will)?

Yes, especially if the same strategies are expected to accomplish both. They're two very different tasks.

Some of this comes down to what counts as an "EA". What kind of conversion do we need to do, and how much? I also think I'll be pretty unsuccessful at getting new core EAs, but what can I get? How hard is it? These are things I'd like to know, and things I believe would be valuable to know.

I think you can convince people to give more of their money away, you can convince people to take the effectiveness of the charity into account, you can convince people to care more about animals or to stop eating meat, and possibly that there are technological risks that are greater than climate change and nuclear war. I don't think you'll convince the same person of all of these things. Rather they'll be individuals that are on board with specific parts and that may or may not identify with EA.

Comment author: peter_hurford 02 April 2014 08:14:57PM -1 points [-]

So you expect movement building / outreach to be a lot less successful than community building ("inreach", if you will)?

Yes, especially if the same strategies are expected to accomplish both. They're two very different tasks.

I wouldn't say the same tasks will work equally well for both. But I do think either would have spillover effects for the other. Right now, it seems we're focused on community building, though.

~

I think you can convince people to give more of their money away, you can convince people to take the effectiveness of the charity into account, you can convince people to care more about animals or to stop eating meat, and possibly that there are technological risks that are greater than climate change and nuclear war. I don't think you'll convince the same person of all of these things. Rather they'll be individuals that are on board with specific parts and that may or may not identify with EA.

I'd be interested in how much overlap there are between these groups. It never was my intention to try and convince people of the entire meme set at once, but I wouldn't rule it out as implausible. I think better understanding these channels (how people come to these beliefs) is most important.

Comment author: mbitton24 02 April 2014 10:07:54PM -2 points [-]

If you're talking about recruiting new EAs, it sounds like you mean people that agree enough with the entire meme set that they identify as EAs. Have there been any polls on what percentage of self-identifying EAs hold which beliefs? It seems like the type of low-hanging fruit .impact could pick off. That poll would give you an idea of how common it is for EAs to believe only small portions of the meme set. I expect that people agree with the majority of the meme set before identifying as EA. I believe a lot more than most people and I only borderline identify as EA.

Comment author: ChristianKl 05 April 2014 08:34:53AM 0 points [-]

If you formulate a bunch of question we could add the poll question to the next LW census. In general formulatting an EA census might also be a worthwhile project.

Comment author: tog 02 May 2014 01:57:35AM 0 points [-]

We've just launched one, with Peter's help: http://lesswrong.com/lw/k60/2014_survey_of_effective_altruists/