I like the more curated approach. One question: is there an RSS feed available for the curated posts? The feed at https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/feed.xml gives the "new & updated" list rather than the "featured" list.

I was looking for exactly this information about the distribution between cause areas during a conversation today, thank you!

Thank you for mentioning the Eco Resilience Initiative, I've been looking for something like this!

I'm curious, did you decide on the entire year's worth of donations through an election? To me, donation elections can be a fun way to generate discussions around giving (I donated to the election fund here after all) but I would never let it decide on a significant part of my donations (let's say 1% at most). If you want to outsource the day-to-day decision making on what charities to give to, then I believe funds are a much more effective tool for that than elections or lotteries.

I allocated my 10% pledge as follows:

• 50% to Founders Pledge (Global Catastrophic Risks Fund)
• 20% to Animal Charity Evaluators (Movement Grants Program)
• 20% to GiveWell (All Grants Fund)
• 5% to GiveWell (Unrestricted Fund)
• 5% to Giving What We Can (Effective Giving Research & Advocacy)

I didn't have a lot of time but I went through the list and selected a few charities that looked especially interesting or novel:

• Alliance for Reducing Microbial Resistance (ARMoR)
• Development Media International (DMI)
• New Incentives
• New Roots Institute
• Sentinel
• The Unjournal

This is purely based on my gut feeling, so I will probably come back to consider my selection more carefully at a later point.

Update: after looking at the current leaderboard, I added ACE and AMF to my votes from a strategic perspective.

Your Welfareans sound a lot like Nozick's utility monster to me. Do you agree to that comparison?

Thanks!

My main reason for trying to be mostly risk-neutral in my donations is that my donations are very small relative to the total size of the problem, while this is not the case for my personal investments. I would donate differently (more risk-averse) if I had control over a significant part of all charitable donations in a given area. In particular, I do not endorse double-or-nothing gambling on the fate of the universe.

You make a good point that OP is more likely to make judgements regarding small donation opportunities, so I'll have to revise my position that small donors should specifically seek out smaller organizations to donate to. But the same argument for "topping up" OP donations could equally be made to support simply donating to an EA fund (which I expect will also take into account how their donations funge with OP).