I ought to pushback against a pretty wide swath of possible arguments and pressures against publishing criticism
If someone is to publish a critique of an EA org and hasn’t shown it to the org, people can say “But you didn’t check it with the org, which we agreed is a norm around here, …”
Aha. Now it seems to me that my reading of the OP and my reaction, as well as others’s reading of my comments, have both followed this pattern:
P1 implicitly proposes to call on some social machinery in some way (in jefftk’s case, the machinery of norm setting; in my case, the machinery of group-epistemology)
P2 objects to a wide swath of proposals to call on that machinery (you, me, others pushing back on this norm setting; jefftk and others push back against trusting group epistemology)
P1 is confused about the response to some other proposal, or the imputation of claims not made
In both cases I think that the most salient thing should be: this social machinery is broken. The norm setting/enforcing machine is broken, and the group epistemology machine is broken.
Aha. Now it seems to me that my reading of the OP and my reaction, as well as others’s reading of my comments, have both followed this pattern:
P1 implicitly proposes to call on some social machinery in some way (in jefftk’s case, the machinery of norm setting; in my case, the machinery of group-epistemology)
P2 objects to a wide swath of proposals to call on that machinery (you, me, others pushing back on this norm setting; jefftk and others push back against trusting group epistemology)
P1 is confused about the response to some other proposal, or the imputation of claims not made
In both cases I think that the most salient thing should be: this social machinery is broken. The norm setting/enforcing machine is broken, and the group epistemology machine is broken.