Separately, I’m going to write a letter in my role as Executive Director of Leverage Research on the topic of harms from our previous psychology research and the structure of the organization.

Geoff, has this letter been published yet? And if not, when will it be published?

Geoff, in relation your recent livestream, which was on the topic of helping to craft good incentives so people can speak up, could you comment on the state of the NDAs, and, if people have not yet been released from them, whether or not you will explicitly release people from them in order to facilitate discussion about Leverage? And if not, why not?

Given your emphasis on symmetry (of incentivizing both positive and negative accounts), it would seem obviously necessary to release people from an agreement to "be generally positive about each other" (the very first agreement in the document), which they may still feel bound by, in order to unbias incentives. Cf. the questions and concerns raised in Rob's comment, which remain pertinent.

It is possible that I missed the link, in which case I apologize, although I am surprised because I did check the website. It doesn't seem that the web archive can verify timestamps.

I am glad I wrote my comments anyway, so that now the links have been shared here on LW, which I don't think they were before, and since Lulie's recording that I linked above seems to have been taken down.

I notice that my comment score above is now zero. I would like others to know that I visited Geoff's website prior to posting my comment to ensure my comment was accurate, and that these links appeared after my above comment.

Noting that it has been 9 days and Geoff has not yet followed though on publishing the 22-minute video. Thankfully, however, a complete audio recording has been made available by another user.

• [ETA: sorry for all the caveats... specifically, I do use judgy language, but don't endorse the judgements, but don't want to change the language.] [The following if taken as a judgement is very harsh and basically unfair, and it would suck to punish Geoff for having conversations like this. So please don't take it as a judgement. I want to get a handle on what's up with Geoff, so I want to describe his behavior. Maybe this is bad, LMK if you think so.] It was often hard to listen to Geoff. He seemed to talk in long, apparently low content sentences with lots of hemming and hawing and attention to appearance, and lots of very general statements that seemed to not address precisely the topic. (Again this is unfairly harsh if taken as a judgement, and also he was talking in front of 50 people, sort of.)

I don't think it's bad of you. It seemed to me that he was deflecting or redirecting many of the points Anna was trying to get at.