I find it interesting that your questions and the answers focus on what is good for the teen joining EA, given that what is good for an EA is, very clearly and explicitly, NOT WHAT EA IS GOING FOR. EA sells itself as being good for strangers, not its members. If we think anyone joining EA is good, presumably we think it is good because of the effect on strangers, not EAs. Why should we think differently about teens compared to adults? The prof points at something, but I don't buy it. I used to work with teens professionally. For the most part, they are quite capable of making rational decisions, pursuing their own goals, and responding to incentives. I think we should mostly be treating them like adults.
I think that's a good point. I focus on the experiences of the individual because that's what this blog is about, the lives of people involved with EA! I definitely don't think this is the full story
Ime this is also how we treat adults - I've seen adults say they were harmed by EA ideas and they are taken seriously and their complaints weighted.
Other idea: While the effects are ofc utmost, it's a higher bar to prove the effectiveness of EA as a whole; more straightforward to ask people if they've found the experience has been beneficial. If it benefits the hobbyist as much as other hobbies i.e. woodworking but it *also* helps others, that incentivizes people towards EA over carpentry.
I find it interesting that your questions and the answers focus on what is good for the teen joining EA, given that what is good for an EA is, very clearly and explicitly, NOT WHAT EA IS GOING FOR. EA sells itself as being good for strangers, not its members. If we think anyone joining EA is good, presumably we think it is good because of the effect on strangers, not EAs. Why should we think differently about teens compared to adults? The prof points at something, but I don't buy it. I used to work with teens professionally. For the most part, they are quite capable of making rational decisions, pursuing their own goals, and responding to incentives. I think we should mostly be treating them like adults.
I think that's a good point. I focus on the experiences of the individual because that's what this blog is about, the lives of people involved with EA! I definitely don't think this is the full story
Ime this is also how we treat adults - I've seen adults say they were harmed by EA ideas and they are taken seriously and their complaints weighted.
Other idea: While the effects are ofc utmost, it's a higher bar to prove the effectiveness of EA as a whole; more straightforward to ask people if they've found the experience has been beneficial. If it benefits the hobbyist as much as other hobbies i.e. woodworking but it *also* helps others, that incentivizes people towards EA over carpentry.