Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 24 April 2017 10:33:04PM *  7 points [-]

Caution: This is not just a survey. It is also a solicitation to create a public online profile.

In the future, please consider separating surveys from solicitations; or disclosing up front that you are not just conducting a survey.

When I got to the part of this that started asking for personally identifying information to create a public online profile, it felt to me like something sneaky was going on: that my willingness to help with a survey was being misused as an entering-wedge to push me to do something I wouldn't have chosen to do.

I considered — for a moment — putting bogus data in as a tit-for-tat defection in retribution for the dishonesty. I didn't do so, because the problem isn't with the survey aspect; it's with the not saying up front what you are up to aspect. Posting this comment seemed more effective to discourage that than sticking a shoe in your data.

Comment author: peter_hurford 25 April 2017 02:09:49AM 4 points [-]

Thanks for the feedback.

I added a paragraph to above saying: "We're also using this as a way to build up the online EA community, such as featuring people on a global map of EAs and with a list of EA Profiles. This way more people can learn about the EA community. We will ask you in the survey if you would like to join us, but you do not have to opt-in and you will be opted-out by default."

The 2017 Effective Altruism Survey - Please Take!

6 peter_hurford 24 April 2017 09:08PM

This year, the EA Survey volunteer team is proud to announce the launch of the 2017 Effective Altruism Survey.



If you're short on time and you've taken the survey in prior years, you can take an abridged donations-only version of the survey here.

If you want to share the survey with others, please use this fancy share link with referral tracking: http://bit.ly/2q8iy2m


What is this?

This is the third survey we've done, coming hot off the heels of the 2015 EA Survey (see results and analysis) and the 2014 EA Survey. (We apologize that we didn't get a 2016 Survey together... it's hard to be an all volunteer team!)

We hope this survey will produce very useful data on the growth and changing attitudes of the EA Community. In addition to capturing a snapshot of what EA looks like now, we also intend to do longitudinal analysis to see how our snapshot has been changing.

We're also using this as a way to build up the online EA community, such as featuring people on a global map of EAs and with a list of EA Profiles. This way more people can learn about the EA community. We will ask you in the survey if you would like to join us, but you do not have to opt-in and you will be opted-out by default.


Who should take this survey?

Anyone who is reading this should take this survey, even if you don't identify as an "effective altruist".


How does the survey work?

All questions are optional (apart from one important question to verify that your answers should be counted). Most are multiple choice and the survey takes around 10-30 minutes. We have included spaces for extra comments if there is some extra detail you would like to add (these are strictly optional).

At the end of the survey there is an 'Extra Credit' section with some more informal questions and opportunities for comment - definitely feel free to skip these questions.

Results will be shared anonymously unless you give your explicit permission otherwise.


Who is behind this?

The EA Survey is a all-volunteer community project run through .impact, which is soon changing it's name to "Rethink Charity". The results will not belong to any one person or organization.

Comment author: casebash 22 April 2017 03:59:12PM 0 points [-]

No, because the fund managers will report on the success or failure of their investments. If the funds don't perform, then their donations will fall.

Comment author: peter_hurford 23 April 2017 07:20:30PM 2 points [-]

Why do you think this? The outside view suggests this won't happen -- disclosing success and failure is uncommon in the non-profit space.

Comment author: gjm 13 February 2017 03:17:34AM 1 point [-]

It's not clear to me that a lack of fixed rules has that consequence. Why do you think that?

Comment author: peter_hurford 14 February 2017 04:37:45AM 0 points [-]

It seems to have had consequences for at least one poster (namely, the OP).

Comment author: ChristianKl 02 February 2017 07:59:37PM 1 point [-]

There are no fixed rules. There are values and value judgments. Don't try to optimize for rules but for what brings LW forward.

Comment author: peter_hurford 11 February 2017 06:01:42PM 0 points [-]

I think we should change this, because a lack of fixed rules makes LW pretty hard to use and helps keep it dead.

Comment author: peter_hurford 29 December 2016 06:48:32PM 0 points [-]

This is pretty cool -- I like the write-up. I don't mean to pry into your life, but I would find it interesting to see an example of how you answer these questions. It would help me internalize the process more.

Comment author: peter_hurford 29 December 2016 06:47:15PM 0 points [-]

What category does writing posts go under? I'm impressed you can do a day job, write posts, and still have a lot of messing around time! :)

Comment author: Elo 29 December 2016 12:21:06AM 0 points [-]


Comment author: peter_hurford 29 December 2016 06:46:04PM 0 points [-]

10:20-1 work meeting (1hr40mins)

Still nitpicking, 10:20-1 is 2hr40min.

Comment author: Elo 29 December 2016 12:32:17AM 1 point [-]

The trouble with this information (and exercises of this type) is that you always had that information available to you, but never really on the one page laid out obviously. There is an insight to be gained in just being able to do that.

That doesn't answer the question fully. This information helps to inform other tasks and processes for example in the "Try this" section of this post http://bearlamp.com.au/exploration-exploitation-problems/

The third thing it does is help defeat a s1/s2 incongruity. you System2 know that these are all the tasks you spend your time on, so in order to System1! change your mind on what you want to do in your time you inform your system 1 that there is no time that has sneakily "escaped" your view, fallen down the back of the couch, or somehow there is "more time" other than what you already have. This is what I consider the most powerful insight of this process.

This is hopefully also explained in the next post in the series - http://bearlamp.com.au/bargaining-trade-offs-in-your-brain/ (this paragraph was added to that post because I really liked the way I described it to you :) Thanks! )

Comment author: peter_hurford 29 December 2016 06:34:25PM 0 points [-]

Ok, that's pretty cool. Thanks!

Comment author: peter_hurford 28 December 2016 04:12:09AM 0 points [-]

I'd be curious to hear more about what you did with this information once you had it.

View more: Next