If there are willing volunteers, I would like to see an adversarial collaboration. Reading through the comments, it is tricky to dis-entangle what people mean, what are the fundamental disagreements, what are the facts of the matter, whether somebody (accidentally) mis-represented somebody else or even themselves, etc.

Some disagreements I see are:
- To what extent are the particular individuals 'bad people / racist / eugenicists'
- How much should the EA community influence the norms of and/or associate with the rationality/forecasting community
- Where the line is between absolute free speech vs moderation for different events (e.g. manifest, or eags, or ...).

Additionally, I would be interested in some kind of prediction markets to resolve some of the empirical questions. E.g. What percentage of EAs would say 'agree' or 'strongly agree' to the statement 'person X should not have been an invited speaker to manifest'.  Note I am new to prediction markets so am not comfortable setting up a question like this which does not have an objective resolution.

Thanks for taking time to think about this and act on it! I have not interacted with EA community much, but things like this show why it is great place to be! :)

Curious why you want to remove this norm. Is it because it makes it less appealing to people outside EA? It is because it gives appearance of being more precise but actually does not do better than using everyday phrases?

For those interested, the question of whether EAG can qualify for 'Gift Aid' is answered on UK Government website:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/gift-aid-what-donations-charities-and-cascs-can-claim-on

"If any donor or person connected to the donor benefits significantly from their donation, it does not qualify for Gift Aid."

EDIT: I am (likely) wrong. EAG can qualify for 'Gift Aid'. See domdomegg's reply for why my comment is incorrect.

I am personally asking for the UK, but I assume answers for other regions will be useful for other people.

What is the current funding status of AISC? 

Which funding bodies have you asked for funding from and do you know why they are not funding this (assuming they chose not to fund this)? The funding options I know about are OpenPhil, EA Funds and Non Linear.

My understanding is you only just managed to get enough funding to run a budget version of AISC 10, so I presume that means you'll be looking for funding for AISC 11.

I notice all the suggestions are field-building. Do you have any examples in mind of "More obscure research directions"? I know you wrote elsewhere that your general view is we need to try lots of different things, so maybe field-building is the key lever from your perspective?

I have done around 20 practice interviews for mathematical subjects for Oxbridge. If in the off chance you need somebody to help do this, feel free to reach out. (If yes, let me know and I will share my contact details with you via linkedin)

Regardless, good luck with this! Very useful for teenagers to get this advice which is otherwise not available.