A plea to EAG Boston presenter... Some presentations stick with you after EAG.  Some evaporate as you leave the room.  While there is a lot of amazing content at EAG, I'd like to seem more consideration on how to deliver a message that sticks.  From my experience presenting to the firing squad, here are some tricks of the trade - 1) Figure out who is your primary audience you are speaking to.  If you try to cover everyone, you will usually lose everyone. 2) Narrow down to the one message you want them to walk away with. 3) Consider tying your main message to a Call to Action. 4) For an hour slot, consider the 10/20/30 rule.     10 slides - less is more;    20 minute talk (+ 20 minutes to fix the internet, A/V gear, etc + 20 minute buffer for audience      interjections);     30 pt font - less is more; 5) Max 7 bullets per slide 6) DO NOT read the slide 7) Be authentic, for your audience to buy your message they need to buy into you If you prefer to hear it from an ex-Apple evangelist saying it more charmingly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51TLge2peLc

Cross-posting Georgia Ray's / @eukaryote's "I got dysentary so you don't have to," a fascinating read on participating in a human challenge trial. 

Edit: Confused about the downvoting here - is it a 'the Forum doesn't need more of this community drama' feeling? I don't really include that much of a personal opinion to disagree with, and I also encourage people to check out Lincoln's whole response 🤷 ---------------------------------------- For visibility, on the LW version of this post Lincoln Quirk - member of the EV UK board made some interesting comments (tagging @lincolnq to avoid sub-posting). I thought it'd be useful to have visibility of them on the Forum. A sentence which jumped out at me was this: If one of the EV board members is feeling this way and doesn't know what to do, what hope for rank-and-file EAs? Is anyone driving the bus? Feels like a negative sign for the broader 'EA project'[1] if this feeling goes right to the top of the institutional EA structure. That sentence comes near the end of a longer, reflective comment, so I recommend reading the full exchange to take in Lincoln's whole perspective. (I'll probably post my thoughts on the actual post sometime next week) 1. ^ Which many people reading this might feel positive about

I spent some time with Claude this morning trying to figure out why I find it cringe calling myself an EA (I never call myself an EA, even though many in EA would call me an EA). The reason: calling myself "EA" feels cringe because it's inherently a movement/community label - it always carries that social identity baggage with it, even when I'm just trying to describe my personal philosophical views. I am happy to describe myself as a Buddhist or Utilitarian because I don't think it does those things (at least, not within the broader community context I find myself in - Western, Online, Democratic, Australia, etc).

For policy recommendations, put forth things that actually build on or move the status quo. For example, recommending a "National Youth Council" without a mandate can be a uniquely bad idea- instead of ignoring your (usually inactive) youth org, now, policymakers will ignore the Council of (usually inactive)youth orgs all while you(the actually proactive person), walk away with the false notion of a job well done.