He really did love carrots. I seem to remember him saving me from (what was possibly) hypoglycemia in the middle of a hike by giving me a carrot.

May his memory be a blessing.

Personally since my grant was probably too small to justify the effort of a clawback, and the statute of limitations had passed, I donated all of it, divided between the GiveWell top charities fund and GiveDirectly.

I somehow missed that 🤦🏼‍♂️.

Having previously criticised the lack of transparency in the EAG admissions process, I'm happy to see this post. Strongly upvoted.

With all the scandals we've seen in the last few years, I think it should be very evident how important transparency is. See also my explanation from last year.

...some who didn't want to be named would have not come if they needed to be on a public list, so barring such people seems silly...

How is it silly? It seems perfectly acceptable, and even preferable, for people to be involved in shaping EA only if they agree for their leadership to be scrutinized.

The EA movement absolutely cannot carry on with the "let's allow people to do whatever without any hindrance, what could possibly go wrong?" approach.

Just a reminder that I think it's the wrong choice to allow attendees to leave their name off the published list.

I haven't listened to that many episodes - in fact, of those you listed I've only listened to the one with Howie Lempel (which also resonated with me). But I think the episode I found most interesting is the one with Mushtaq Khan about effectively fighting corruption in developing countries.

As an Ashkenazi Jew myself, saying "we'd like to make everyone like Ashkenazi Jews" feels just like a mirror image of Nazism that very clearly should not appear on the forum