Reflections on Berkeley REACH
This post covers my findings so far in the experiment of running the Berkeley Rationality and Effective Altruism Community Hub (REACH). Crossposted on EA Forum and LessWrong. tl;dr * REACH has been running since March 2018 (around three months) * It’s doing well * Hundreds of people have enjoyed REACH * During the day, there are generally between 3 and 10 people coworking * Regular events draw 10-40 people * Large one-time events draw around 100 * It has broad support -- over 100 people have donated significant time (from one afternoon of work up to around 40 hours) and/or money * Patreon, one-time donations, and guest rooms have covered the rent until it was recently raised * Community guests can stay there for relatively low prices for the area * It has been full 75% of the time in May * I’d like you to be involved * Visit and attend events at REACH * Volunteer (see this doc for some ways to help) * Host events * Monday, Thursday, and Friday nights are currently available for recurring or one-time events (see calendar) * Help bridge our funding gap * Rent has gone up to $6k/month unless we find a new venue * We need to be able to pay a manager * Managing the space takes 10-30 hours per week * Help us find and apply for grants * already planning to re-apply for CEA and BERI grants * Put your own money in the pot if you find the project valuable (see Patreon or Paypal) * Provide specific items to improve the space Why We Needed a Community Space What A Physical Space Can Do for Community Around December 2017, I started thinking that it would be really nice to have a central place where community members could: * Conveniently host events (a function that had been fulfilled by the CFAR office before the switch to badged access) * Cowork with community members during the day * Come for low-key spontaneous socializ
What does winning look like to you? Lots of rationalists have pretty successful careers as programmers, which depending on what they are going for, could be considered winning. Is it that they aren't "winning" by your definition, or theirs?
Can you describe the thing you think rationalists are failing at, tabooing "winning"?