How is that better than individuals just donating to wherever they think makes sense on the margin?

I think the comment already addresses that here:

moreover, rule by committee enables deliberation and information transfer, so that persuasion can be used to make decisions and potentially improve accuracy or competence at the loss of independence.

This article has a lot of downvoting (net karma of 39 from 28)

This does not seem to be an unusual amount of downvoting to me. The net karma is even higher than the number of votes!

As a more general point, I think people should worry less about downvotes on posts with a high net karma.

At the same time though I don't think you mean to endorse 1).

I have read or skimmed some of his posts and my sense is that he does endorse 1). But at the same time he says

critics seem to frequently conflate my arguments with other, simpler positions that can be more easily dismissed.

so maybe this is one of these cases and I should be more careful.

A recent comment says that restriction has been lifted and the website will be updated next week: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/aBkALPSXBRjnjWLnP/announcing-the-q1-2025-long-term-future-fund-grant-round?commentId=FFFMBth8v7WBqYFzP

the AI won't ever have more [...] capabilities to hack and destroy infrastructure than Russia, China or the US itself.

Having better hacking capability than China seems like a low bar for super-human AGI. The AGI would need to be better at writing and understanding code than a small group of talented humans, and have access to some servers. This sounds easy if you accept the premise of smarter-than-human AGI.

Merely listing EA under "Memetics adjacence" does not support the claim "is also an avowed effective altruist."

it's the arguments you least agree with that you should extend the most charity to

I strongly disagree with flat earthers, but I don't think that I should extend a lot of charity to arguments for a flat earth.

Also, on a quick skim, I could not find where this is argued for in the linked "I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup"

Caveat: I consider these minor issues, I hope I don't come across as too accusatory.

Interesting, why's that? :)

It seems that the reason for cross-posting was that you personally found it interesting. If you use the EA forum team account, it sounds a bit like an "official" endorsement, and makes the Forum Team less neutral.

Even if you use another account name (eg "selected linkposts") that is run by the Forum Team, I think there should be some explanation how those linkposts are selected, otherwise it seems like arbitrarily privileging some stuff over other stuff.

A "LinkpostBot" account would be good if the cross-posting is automated (e.g. every ACX article who mentions Effective Altruism).

I also personally feel kinda weird getting karma for just linking to someone else's work

I think its fine to gain Karma by virtue of linkposting and being an active forum member, I will not be bothered by it and I think you should not worry about that (although i can understand that it might feel uncomfortable to you). Other people are also allowed to link-post.

Personally when I see a linkpost, I generally assume that the author here is also the original author

I think starting the title with [linkpost] fixes that issue.

I think its best to post this under your own account.