• Awoo [she/her]
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I don't see a problem with examinations existing for competency. Without it how do you ensure that the committees are elevating people based on merit?

    I don't see it as a restriction on who you can vote for, you can vote for anyone on the committee but they need to be studious enough to pass the qualification check which I assume is like an exam?

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I don't see it as a restriction on who you can vote for, you can vote for anyone on the committee

      Don't give me that. Ultimately the entire thing is meant to restrict candidates to a whitelist, the only question is whether that is a good thing or a bad thing. Saying you can vote for anyone who made the whitelist and therefore the vote is not restricted is silly question-begging and it's below you.

      • Awoo [she/her]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Huh? No? If you have the capability to pass the test you're not being restricted to a whitelist? It's a test, with pass and failure thresholds. Anyone can study to pass a test, particularly if there's no limit to the number of times you can fail it.

        The party has an entrance exam to join as a standard member at the lowest level, why wouldn't you have further exams for the more advance levels?