Agree with Ben that this makes it harder to find folks for leadership positions.

In addition to excluding shy awkward nerds, you're also actively selecting for a bunch of personality traits, not all of which are unalloyed positives.

By analogy, I think there's a very strong argument that very high levels of scrutiny are fair game for politicians but I'm not particularly thrilled with what that does to our candidate pool.

(I don't know of a great way to resolve this tension.)

Anybody else in addition to Fukuyama, Friedman, and Cummings who you think is good at doing the kind of thinking you're pointing to here?

Are there alternatives to your two factor model that seem particularly plausible to you?

No worries! It takes a couple clicks to get there.

Hey Larks,

[For transparency - I no longer work at EV.]

Yep - this was followed up on. Here are links to the pages for EV UK and EV US.

This is correct. We ended up needing to resolve a couple issues related to the inquiry before we can file. We’ve stayed in touch with the Charity Commission about the delay.

Additional restaurants I'd recommend:

• Buddha Bodai (Chinatown) has my favorite vegetarian Chinese food. 
  • The non-vegetarian colleagues I introduced it to ended up ordering lunch there once/week for months. 
  • When I was in college, it was one of two restaurants that helped convince me I could survive as a vegetarian. (RIP Williamsburg's Foodswings, which had the world's best vegan buffalo wings).
• Red Bamboo (Washington Square Park) has great vegan bbq wings and chicken. 

I wanted to make some additional non-EA recommendations but don't want to blow up the comments section with non-EA stuff, so here's a thread for people to do that.

Thanks for sharing. I think it was brave and I appreciated getting to read this. I'm sorry you've had to go through this and am glad to hear you're feeling optimistic.

This seems like an improvement to me. Thanks!

Feedback on a minor pain point for me. When I'm looking at quick takes on the front page and want to go to the permalink for the relevant take (e.g. to see all the discussion under it), I often look around for a big title to click on for a while before remembering that I'm supposed to click on the icon on the top right, which is small, doesn't stand out much, and feels too me like it's somehow violating an implicit expectation I have for where to find this for this kind of content.

I have no clue whether this is just me, whether this is worth addressing, or what a good solution would be. (It does make sense to me that quick takes don't have big titles like a normal top level post would.)

Probably the best thing I got out of two years in law school. . .