This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is n00bdragon with a comment about Florida’s age-gating law and its esoteric definition of addiction:
Is anyone else bothered by this incredibly strange definition of “addiction”? Is YMCA soccer addicting if 10% of a youth soccer team (one player) plays soccer for more than two hours a day?
In second place, it’s Stephen T. Stone with a reply to a comment celebrating MAGA’s electoral victories:
Congratulations, you got record-high inflation, higher prices on gas and diesel, a militarized police force working on the president’s order to commit human trafficking with a side of murder, the kind of war your diaper-wearing piss-stain of a president said he wouldn’t start, and a massive reduction in the reputation of the United States amongst longtime allies. Are ya winnin’ hard enough to get sick of it, Trumpist?
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out with a response from MrWilson expanding on the first place winning comment about addiction:
It’s all arbitrary bullshit and has to be because it’s impossible to create definitions that would actually work for every scenario. A kid using Facebook messenger to get math tutoring help from his friend for two hours could count as “addiction” here.
It’s all substituting broadbrush generalizations in lieu of parents paying attention to what their kids are doing online, or even better, having honest relationships that mean their kids actually talk to them about what they’re encountering online.
Addiction should only be determined by a trained psychiatrist in individual cases after direct observation, not by politicians grand-standing and virtue-signaling their “think of the children” schtick that supports the “re-elect me so I can continue to get campaign donations from wealthy donors and insider trading stock tips” schtick.
Next, it’s Thad with a comment about the observation that ICE is inflicting injustices on the US citizens that Trump believes are inherently superior to everyone else:
Let’s not pretend we don’t know who he really means when he says “citizens”.
Over on the funny side, things are awfully slow: not a single comment even got enough votes to earn a funny badge, and in fact nothing even really came close. So in lieu of the normal section, we’ll just wrap things up with one single editor’s choice. It’s another comment about the “two hours a day” addiction definition, this time from an anonymous commenter:
no no I think they’re cooking here. We just need to extend this to its only logical conclusion: the 14 hour work week.
That’s all for this week, folks!