Riot Games is violating California employment law

Re:Riot Games is violating California employment law by hyperpape on Saturday June 11, 2016 @04:32PM (#11885203)

I thought it was clear enough that I was making a general point about how tests can be applied, and illustrating it with an extreme example from the South.

In general, I think asking for clarification is better than being condescending.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Riot Games is violating California employment law by Turing_Machine on Saturday June 11, 2016 @04:36PM (#11885216)

Got it. Of course, your mini-lecture about "not assuming good faith" wasn't condescending at all.

I spent a fair amount of time researching this urban legend earlier today. I wasn't "assuming" anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Riot Games is violating California employment law by hyperpape on Saturday June 11, 2016 @06:29PM (#11885653)

Fair that it was abrupt of me to put it that way.

But to make clear what I was saying, I really should have responded to the parent, who says: "It's extremely hard to believe that even a malicious scientist could convince himself that a horse cannot be ridden into town."

My point being that a malicious test-giver could certainly deny that as a valid answer. I don't know that I believe that anecdote happened, but it is assuming good faith to think that it couldn't happen because no one would ever reject "horse" as an answer.

[ Parent | on HN ]