This sounds like a nice, helpful tool that I intuitively think will be valuable to ensure people think clearly about how to make efforts in a concrete directions. I really like the 3 "paths" for this.

I don't understand this, though: how do you suggest tracking people's answers to this tool? How is the data consolidated?

Really nice to make this a part of the EAG family framework!

Regarding the naming: I guess it depends on the location, but for instance in France, a lot of people we'd like to participate still have not heard about EA. In such contexts, I think it's probably a better idea to avoid calling the event "EA <something>" and to choose something like "Impact <summit? day? expo? ignition?>", so that even people not familiar with the movement can have an idea about the theme as soon as they hear the title.

Interesting topic ideas, thanks in advance Gergő!

Quick question: why not write on the EA Forum? I am not convinced by "the most valuable conversations on field building are happening when people share their hot takes at conferences, retreats, or between staff members of fieldbuilding orgs that are just a bit too edgy to write up for the EA forum". Is it just a better "writer experience"?

To be clear, I am interested enough in your views that I went to Substack and subscribed to your newsletter! It seems to me that for your topics, there are much stronger reasons to stay on the forum than for leaving it: I suppose you'll get more readers; it will be more convenient for said readers; there's a good comments system; the audio transcription; there are previous of within-forum links; and probably other important things I'm forgetting.

If you want people to take your writings less seriously, and to be able to write without spending hours reviewing your texts, maybe you could use the "quick takes"?

(super interested to hear what was in favor of Substack! :) )

The context might vary and make me reconsider in certain instances, but I generally think it's important to say that there are ways to act that are orders of magnitude more effective than others. So yes, insist on "more" rather than on "the most possible"... But with an emphasis on the fact that there are resources to help you and guide you towards options that are likely to be immensely more impactful than most actions.

I think it's very valuable to post this like you did, for you probably but also for others (like me) to see what kind of methodological traps and limitations arise in this kind of effort. Thanks!

You mentioned this "big question": How effective is the GHSI at actually driving change in the biosecurity field? 
The GHSI is a really nice tool created by big orgs, so I think it's necessary and useful to break this down into subquestions like you did. IMO it's also good, while researcher these questions (who engages with the index, and how? Is this legible and actionable?) further, to take a step back to consider the limits of the whole approach, like the fact that analyzing at national-level raises some issues, given how international dynamics emerge during such times of crisis (Moeen mentioned this in the GDoc's comments).

Your comments here and there make sense to me. I feel like it's quite straightforward in theory, and harder to do in practice.

I do observe that some orgs are leagues above others in communicating, and I feel like the two important reasons for this are
- the org's willingness to allocate resources to professional communication work
- the extent to which the org's activity lends itself to communication (eg most orgs working with cute animals have an advantage here).

Naive and broad question: what should EA and EA orgs do differently to interest non-EA donors?
(are there things you feel are frequently under-appreciated by EA actors?)

Thanks a lot for the hard work! This will certainly be useful to people interested in biosecurity careers in our group!

Thanks a lot to you (and to Claude) for this!
I hadn't realized that context windows are now big enough to feed entire chapters.

Thank you very much for taking the time to write this, Alix!