Comments on: The big question: is our project 1.0 or 2.0? http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/ Exploring how to get real change for your dollar. Thu, 17 May 2012 06:13:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Cheap phentermine online. http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-17116 Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:27:37 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-17116 <strong>Drugstore phentermine online....</strong> Phentermine online. Phentermine 37.5 mg online prescription mastercard. Cheapest phentermine online. Buy phentermine online 37.5mg no prescription.... Drugstore phentermine online….

Phentermine online. Phentermine 37.5 mg online prescription mastercard. Cheapest phentermine online. Buy phentermine online 37.5mg no prescription….

]]> by: The GiveWell Blog - Exploring how to get real change for your dollar. » My vision http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-8106 Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:13:50 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-8106 [...] In this setup, everyone is putting in the amount of time they have to give - and using it in a way that is reasonable and realistic. Serious donors can’t reasonably evaluate charities - they can’t do that much due diligence - but they can read what clear funds come up with, and evaluate those clear funds’ ability to reason logically, explain themselves well, and (eventually) pick grantees that are able to get things done. And once they do, their opinions become worth something. Then, we can build all the great social networking tools in the world to help donors aggregate their opinions, find the recommendations of people who think like them, etc. Then, and only then, will personal recommendations and big-name endorsements indicate something other than flashy fundraising. [...] […] In this setup, everyone is putting in the amount of time they have to give - and using it in a way that is reasonable and realistic. Serious donors can’t reasonably evaluate charities - they can’t do that much due diligence - but they can read what clear funds come up with, and evaluate those clear funds’ ability to reason logically, explain themselves well, and (eventually) pick grantees that are able to get things done. And once they do, their opinions become worth something. Then, we can build all the great social networking tools in the world to help donors aggregate their opinions, find the recommendations of people who think like them, etc. Then, and only then, will personal recommendations and big-name endorsements indicate something other than flashy fundraising. […]

]]> by: Julius http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-4666 Sun, 20 May 2007 23:24:42 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-4666 We've put the site online: http://www.helpalot.org We released early, so there might be some rough edges. Love to hear your feedback. We’ve put the site online:
http://www.helpalot.org

We released early, so there might be some rough edges. Love to hear your feedback.

]]> by: Julius http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-36 Fri, 09 Feb 2007 21:07:28 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-36 Hi, reading your "About GiveWell" I'm definately interested in getting in contact, so please mail me. "I think the project of collecting evidence (what we’re focusing on) is more important than connecting friends. But both are important." Yes, both are important, as I see it, the connecting part is only a tool, giving people a social context where some sort of social controll takes place. You don't want to lie when your friends are listening. Taking the restaurant example; there are people who do visit the charities and have personal contact with these charities. The idea is to give these people a voice. For example a friend of sister went to Kisumu in Kenia to help orphans and I talked to her about her visit. I might not have been there myself, but I dare to say that what she was doing was a good thing. I'm willing to put my social reputation on the line for that and put it on my profile. Well I could write a long comment about all this, but let's first get in email contact and see if and how we could collaborate. If you want to write a post about charity social networks, you'd have to take a look at change.org. I'm not related to the project, but it has some overlap with Helpalot and just went online this week. Maybe you can give some feedback on both concepts, what you think are the strong and weak points of both sites. I could send you more info on Helpalot if needed. Hi, reading your “About GiveWell” I’m definately interested in getting in contact, so please mail me.

“I think the project of collecting evidence (what we’re focusing on) is more important than connecting friends. But both are important.”

Yes, both are important, as I see it, the connecting part is only a tool, giving people a social context where some sort of social controll takes place. You don’t want to lie when your friends are listening. Taking the restaurant example; there are people who do visit the charities and have personal contact with these charities. The idea is to give these people a voice.

For example a friend of sister went to Kisumu in Kenia to help orphans and I talked to her about her visit. I might not have been there myself, but I dare to say that what she was doing was a good thing. I’m willing to put my social reputation on the line for that and put it on my profile.

Well I could write a long comment about all this, but let’s first get in email contact and see if and how we could collaborate.

If you want to write a post about charity social networks, you’d have to take a look at change.org. I’m not related to the project, but it has some overlap with Helpalot and just went online this week.

Maybe you can give some feedback on both concepts, what you think are the strong and weak points of both sites. I could send you more info on Helpalot if needed.

]]> by: Holden http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-35 Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:51:54 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-35 I think social networking features are valuable. I do want eventually to incorporate them into GiveWell. So collaboration may be possible. Taste vs. quality was part of my point, but not all of it. If your friend recommends a restaurant, it's because he's been to it. He's eaten there, he's been served by its staff - the simple act of consuming from the restaurant has given him a ton of relevant evidence. "Consuming from" (giving to) a charity does not necessarily involve gathering any evidence. I don't know what charities to give to; my friends don't know; their friends don't know; and unlike with restaurants, there is no natural/organic way of finding out. One of us has to make a deliberate and time-consuming effort to collect evidence. (Once that happens, the social network becomes useful.) I think the project of collecting evidence (what we're focusing on) is more important than connecting friends. But both are important. If you'd like, I'll send you an email / comment in the next couple days to discuss your project more specifically. I think social networking features are valuable. I do want eventually to incorporate them into GiveWell. So collaboration may be possible.

Taste vs. quality was part of my point, but not all of it. If your friend recommends a restaurant, it’s because he’s been to it. He’s eaten there, he’s been served by its staff - the simple act of consuming from the restaurant has given him a ton of relevant evidence.

“Consuming from” (giving to) a charity does not necessarily involve gathering any evidence. I don’t know what charities to give to; my friends don’t know; their friends don’t know; and unlike with restaurants, there is no natural/organic way of finding out. One of us has to make a deliberate and time-consuming effort to collect evidence. (Once that happens, the social network becomes useful.)

I think the project of collecting evidence (what we’re focusing on) is more important than connecting friends. But both are important.

If you’d like, I’ll send you an email / comment in the next couple days to discuss your project more specifically.

]]> by: Julius http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-34 Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:03:54 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2007/02/03/the-big-question-is-our-project-10-or-20/#comment-34 Hi, my name is Julius, initiator of Helpalot.org. "And with most expenditures, you’re trying to please yourself - so it makes sense to talk to people like you and see what they like. With charity, you’re trying to improve the world; your personal values play a role, but it’s less like figuring out the best restaurant to eat at (in which case it matters a lot whether a referrer has similar tastes to yours) and more like figuring out how to build the best bridge (what matters is that it works)." My vision is that one of the main problems is that it is hard to find out if you can trust a charity. Especially the really small charities. The social network element is there to help you pick a charity (project) because you can use the flow of trust from your personal network. If a friend of a friend supports a charity, the chances are bigger that this charity is trustworthy. So for me it is not so much about the 'taste', but more on the quality. I just found your site, so I haven't yet really researched it. As you did know about Helpalot.org, do you think there is some sort of collaboration possible? Julius Hi, my name is Julius, initiator of Helpalot.org.

“And with most expenditures, you’re trying to please yourself - so it makes sense to talk to people like you and see what they like. With charity, you’re trying to improve the world; your personal values play a role, but it’s less like figuring out the best restaurant to eat at (in which case it matters a lot whether a referrer has similar tastes to yours) and more like figuring out how to build the best bridge (what matters is that it works).”

My vision is that one of the main problems is that it is hard to find out if you can trust a charity. Especially the really small charities.

The social network element is there to help you pick a charity (project) because you can use the flow of trust from your personal network. If a friend of a friend supports a charity, the chances are bigger that this charity is trustworthy. So for me it is not so much about the ‘taste’, but more on the quality.

I just found your site, so I haven’t yet really researched it. As you did know about Helpalot.org, do you think there is some sort of collaboration possible?

Julius

]]>