This is a noble aim but I'm a bit put off by the pitch's focus, in its "why you" section, on _work_ rather than _results_. Anyone can put in many years, many words, many publications and fail to make any progress towards their stated goals. And someone who so heavily emphasises proof of *effort* rather than proof of *outcome* makes me concerned that the author is not aware of the fact that effort and results are often not correlated - that they think that this emphasis is justified itself causes me to update away from believing in their work. So I think this is an angle of the pitch that needs reworking to have people consider your idea more seriously.
Viewing post in Formalizing Morality (Neodore) jam comments
1. Totally fair criticism! In fact I think the pitch has much to improve upon
2. I put that there bc most of my R&D has been monk-mode stealth so I didn't have much to show publicly sadly / explaining it wouldve taken up more space from the 3 pages and i was running out of time. I also would rate my pitch very low in its current state.
3. I do think however that in the absence of the other evidence, showing consistent and thorough persistence and engagement is a signal, obviously not as strong as pure outcomes; but although they aren't guarantees, I do think a lot of deep research discoveries / invention come from people who spend a lot of time focusing on the problem from many angles before cracking it. + it's also proof that the person is doing it not for the money, etc. there is some signal, but i agree w/ you it's not enough! The effort volume isn't to convince people of the idea, but of the dedication to it. that it's not some side hobby or fleeting idea i just had that i will drop at any moment, etc.