> And even if they 'win' it's very hard for them to admit it and dissolve their organizations. But doesn't that mean that the suggested filter is indeed a good

> And even if they 'win' it's very hard for them to admit it and dissolve their organizations. But doesn't that mean that the suggested filter is indeed a good one? Given an activist organization, how should I assess whether 1) they are genuinely raising awareness for and/or acting to set right something they believe to be a problem, and which indeed is a problem, or 2) it failed to perform apoptosis after fulfilling its original purpose, and now clings to survival by trying to find or even create new problems. Since the latter will be more likely to be observed, being sceptical of an activist organization seems a good idea a priori. Especially if it has existed for a while already, or if it has considerable funds and/or is well known (which may increase resistance to a dissolution; "We have all this financial support and awareness, we can use it to do more good! Quick, what else is wrong in the world that we totally have the expertise to fix?").