I am still fascinated by how people are so sure they are right on this issue, in opposite directions
5 posts in 5 hours is way too many. People will be much more generous if you space things out or put them on shortform. I've never discussed this with anyone else, but if I was going to make up a number it would be no more than two posts per month unless they're getting fantastic karma, and and avoid having two posts above the fold at the same time.
I tragically linked to the wrong place, you can find the form here: https://docs.google.com/forms/u/1/d/14pMLroudQ961GHvhl8UpC15nCW9bWdSrEOMpcwwEY4I/edit
I'm really surprised to hear you say this (ignoring update since I'm focusing on a different aspect). My sense was you didn't think much of most social norms, and I would have predicted you'd see being gay in the 1950s as admirable independence from stupid social conventions.
In the next post I’ll do a wider but shallower review of other instances of EA being hurt by a lack of epistemic immune system. I already have a long list, but it’s not too late for you to share your examples.
I wrote this two months ago, and people could fairly be asking “so where is it then?”. I especially worry that I broke something of a promise to vegan advocacy that they were a transitory step in criticizing something larger.
When I published this, I had a lot of the planned next post already written. A few things happened that slowed me down, but the bigger problem is that the laundry list post never felt right. It was always covering too much, too fast. For the time being I’ve been publishing targeted criticisms bit by by on EAForum quick takes (as well as some non-public stuff). I haven’t cross-posted to LessWrong because I didn’t want my LW wall overrun with deeply in the weeds criticism of EA. But if you are interested, or just want to verify I haven’t dropped the topic, you can check out my quick takes and posts on EAF.
Data point (not RCTs, more vulnerable to placebo):
Guzey substantially retracted this a year later. I think it would be great to publish both together as a case study of self-experimentation, but would be against publishing this on its own.