Andy Eggers

Excellent either way, thanks

If you have any ideas of how to accomplish that, I'd love to hear them.

Right. In practice this might require either delaying publication of the critique (with costs to critique authors and maybe the community) or foregoing peer review of the authors' "last word" rejoinder. In our standard procedure the original authors get to weigh in on the critique during our review.

💯

What do you think we should be doing better/differently? I'm not directly involved in these cases, and I think some who were involved are not on the team anymore. In general our policy has been to welcome productive critiques/replications in the journal.

A friend texted me a few days ago that ”They are actually cutting down the trees, apparently at the request of neighbors. And repairing the retaining wall they accidentally knocked down earlier this year while pruning."

Saint Olaf College is making a tenure track hire in feminist philosophy. We have great students, a lively, collegial department, and are near the vibrant twin cities metro area. Great job! Drop me a line with any questions. philjobs.org/job/show/29582

Mediocre religion

Mrs. Gaga

The Sobbing Sobbers

A Band

Dukes of Leon

Guns 'n carnations

Thump!

The K Street Band

Evanston

Penny Creek

Tony? Toni? Toné?

Local anesthesia

Taylor Moderately Fast

Destiny's niece

Tony! Toni!

Yes. If you don't have tasks for which this makes sense, then move along.

EPSA have announced that they will hold a conference in July 2026.

😵‍💫 We understand that there might be some confusion about EPSS and EPSA.

👉🏽 So we thought we would clarify some things.

A short 🧵

Can be more or less sophisticated at both stages (assessing what will be implemented, assessing what will happen if implemented). The reason I'm writing all this is I think about this with voting. Also let's catch up soon

Back from run. A summary: expected value of action (eg support policy) depends on distribution of policies implemented given support for action and expected utilities of policies; expected utility of a policy depends on distribution of outcomes given implementation of policy.

I hope that made sense, I'm going running now

- naive strategic: expected utility from each policy ignores reality about implementation, but considers others's likely actions when deciding what to support
- sophisticated strategic: expected utility from each policy considers reality, considers others when deciding what to support

depends on beliefs about what others will do. You could have types:
- naive expressive: expected utility from each policy ignores reality about implementation, supports whatever has highest EU
- sophisticated expressive: EU from each policy considers reality, supports highest EU policy (cont'd)

The policy implemented depends on interactions with others, so there could be some strategy. Each policy is associated with an (expected) utility, which also depends on context and maybe other actors. One question is whether to call it "strategic" if someone's expected utility from a policy (cont'd)