And if readers were ‘mostly competent’, and able to decipher the truth, we wouldn’t even be having this convo
Strange how many purporting to wave the banner of "equality and diversity" want absolute control over others, rather than respect the natural sovereignty of the individual.
Printing presses and distribution were expensive - even more so back in the day and before their invention it held - arguably even more so.
It may be a good ideal for having ideas standing on their own weight but a precedent it is not.
Regardless of competency, there should be some eligibility requirements to vote. Holding a job should be one. Proof of citizenship should be another.
1. Do you have any evidence that people were more competent at a younger age in 1800? In fact I would think that the opposite is probably true - but again this seems impossible to prove so I'm simply asking you if you have any reason to believe what you're saying is true other than your feelings.
2. People without jobs have just as many rights as those with jobs. Do you also think people without land should not vote? Perhaps not women? Maybe black votes should have less of an impact? I'm curious if you're not American- maybe this would explain a cultural difference I am missing?
How does flipping burgers qualify you to have a say in how to run a country?
Take away votes from the uneducated, the criminal, the insane, people with low IQ, and the tax dodging millionaires.
Quit trying to micro manage everyone.
Accept payment to publish messages on a competitive platform - and let readers, being mostly competent adults, figure content out themselves.