I came up with the idea and basic method, then asked Paul if he would provide a donor lottery facility. He did so, and has been taking in entrants and solving logistical issues as they come up.
I agree that thinking/researching/discussing more dominates the gains in the $1-100k range.
Is giving small amounts of money away really something that individuals should spend a lot of time thinking about—like many days of research?
Is picking 9 other people whose competence you trust and delegating the decision to a randomly chosen one of them much easier than just doing whatever research you wanted to do, and then sharing your results? Are givewell doing duch a bad job at making recommendations that you have to improvise this and do their job for them?
I came up with the idea and basic method, then asked Paul if he would provide a donor lottery facility. He did so, and has been taking in entrants and solving logistical issues as they come up.
I agree that thinking/researching/discussing more dominates the gains in the $1-100k range.
Is giving small amounts of money away really something that individuals should spend a lot of time thinking about—like many days of research?
Is picking 9 other people whose competence you trust and delegating the decision to a randomly chosen one of them much easier than just doing whatever research you wanted to do, and then sharing your results? Are givewell doing duch a bad job at making recommendations that you have to improvise this and do their job for them?
I think we have an underassignment of credit problem here. You can’t both be the junior partner in this. :P
Thanks for describing the details a bit more.
I too agree that the gains mainly come from more/better evaluation.