Well, yes and no. I realize that there's no reason you have to give a mouse a glass of milk just because you gave him a cookie, but the hyperbole was there to illustrate a point. There are all sorts of creative choices one can choose to do. None are inherently better than others. I'm not saying it wouldn't be a nice small thing, but I think all of these things are nice small things. I'm just saying I'm not going to fault them for not choosing that specific small thing - particularly since I can count the number of times that barbarian uprisings due to unhappiness has happened to me on one hand, so it's going to rarely be seen (compare this to wonders or great works, which is designed to encourage you to see the effort they put into it). In a new happiness system where such reports were built in for both positives and negatives (perhaps combining the We Love the King Day system) I could see it. But I really can't see it as a worthwhile use of resources for a system that was tacked on in a patch and was essentially created solely because people would exploit the game by running -100 happiness and conquer the world. ETA: It's worth noting that the slippery slope is better described as a metaphor, not a fallacy. There's nothing inherently wrong with slippery slopes as long as you can explain why they are, in fact, slippery. Most slippery slopes fail because those who raise them fail to think this through. But if there is a reason for why going to X will lead to Z, it's not inherently wrong to consider it.