> Is the logical conclusion really that because other EAs couldn't recognize SBF as a scammer, we should not even try to measure the impact of charitable donations?
My (logical) conclusion is that since other EAs couldn't recognize SBF as a scammer, we should double- and triple-check all of their math about risk and effectiveness, instead of trusting them. Not saying the idea of charitable giving has lost merit, rather its primary champions in the last decade have lost a ton of credibility.
