Can you elaborate on “balancing risks regarding the choppy years”?

I can also unblock it manually at any point, and keep the full uncensored log of posts on a blockchain

Thanks for sharing your opinion. Regarding security: Using a full body of an email you can generate a zero knowledge using an offline tool (since all emails are hashed and signed by the email server). No new emails need to be exchanged

Regarding donor recognition, I think online recognition makes a lot of sense, e.g. colored nickname on the forum, or a badge of some sorts (like the one GWWC encourages).

Thank you for clearly laying out the arguments for donating to the Lightcone. I will! 

Zero Knowledge Proofs allow proving that you are a part of a certain group without revealing who exactly. This can allow credible whistleblowing. For example, if some ML company issues a list of it's employees linked to ethereum wallets (or any other cryptographic key pair of choice),  then any of it's employees would have an option to whistleblow on unsafe practices, while being 100% sure it's impossible to know who made this post. 

This seem awesome to me and I wonder if anyone else shares my fascination and think this could be useful

One idea for the metric would be to elicit pairwise comparison between projects continuously, and derive ELO rating from it. The biggest advantage of this system is that it requires much less time to compare two projects rather then give some form of rating to it like: X reduction of p(Doom)

Would it be possible to make an opt-in EigenKarma layer on top of twitter (but independent from it)? I can imagine parsing say 100k most popular twitter accounts plus all of personal tweets and likes of people who opted in to the EigenKarma layer, and then building a customised twitter feed for them

What’s great about the current setup is it doesn’t produce any additional friction for users since it’s built on top of an existing post-voting system. However, one downside is that number of my given upvotes doesn’t perfectly tracks the trust I assign to the user. E.g. as pointed out by previous commenters, prolific posters could post more often and collect more likes than they intuitively “deserve.” This particular issue can be mitigated by capping the effective number of upvotes to a given user by certain defined number.

The most popular Russian speaking poker forum uses a karma system, where everyone can explicitly assign karma to each other in a range [-100:100]. It served as an analog of google map reviews for users, and I personally found it super useful, since it helped distinguish trustworthy people and helped establishing financial relations (like lending or staking each other). I should say it worked pretty well! 
I think displaying the eigenvector of this karma matrix, would be even more useful. EigenKarma would also allow making anonymous ratings while being resistant to botnets.

Sorry, I'm not coming, decided to go to EAGx Prague

I'd love to come for a chat!