3 ms·
> Thus the slippery slope argument That wasn't an argument I made though. I asked: > Who gets to set the test? Which gets to the core of the point. The curre
by Someone1234 5y ago
> Thus the slippery slope argument
That wasn't an argument I made though. I asked:
> Who gets to set the test?
Which gets to the core of the point. The current requirements are fixed in legal stone and nobody gets to alter them. They aren't being [ab]used for political advantage.
People on here are proposing arbitrary ability tests that [someone] gets to create and alter using [some] undefined methodology.
You combine that with the history of ability-based testing (which, incidentally none of the existing requirements are) and it leaves a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths.
- tshaddox 5y agoI don't really understand your argument. All laws are set in stone and unalterable, except by the legislature of course. A proposal to change the requirements for an elected office would require the same process as any other legislative change. In the case of the governor of Missouri, this would require amending the Missouri Constitution. I don't think anyone is proposing that some random Hacker News commenter gets to create and alter a test whenever and however they want.