xtqv

Daisy chaining is irrelevant to the problem that you can buy 18ga "lighting-only" extensions that bear a 15A rated NEMA 15R but are limited to 8A.

Daisy chaining a power bar with it's own circuit breaker can be ideal if it prevents someone from making the mistake of using a circuit in a way that trips a panel breaker, ie preventing your spouse from plugging a vacuum into a circuit shared by several rooms.

It's not about simply "allowing" judgment; it's about the credibility of those passing judgment. Experience, education, and critical thinking are the pillars upon which valid judgments stand.

Basing one's opinion heavily on one experience, viewed from the outside, is a demonstration of anchoring bias and egocentric bias respectively. Outside perspective cannot include what personal revelations or trauma processing is going on inside the head of the "apathetic" experiencer. It overlooks the diversity of experiences and potential reasons behind the observed behaviour, and is intellectually dishonest in avoiding the other cannabis consumption methods which points to a lack of depth in judgment.

Indeed, a person with a strongly held opinion based on an anecdote, wrought with textbook cognitive biases, is the kind of person who would deny themselves the opportunity to see their cognitive bases in action because of their snap judgment. Should we value judgments made by this kind of person? What kind of person should impose rules on others?

Apologies, I feel silly. Completely missed the "me" part. English is not my first language

Where's the source for this? You've italicized as if this is a quote but neither DDG or Google shows any results for any quoted portion.

Australian media's successful extortion only serves to prove such a model works.

Perhaps you've strengthened certain HN commenters' arguments that incentive exists with a proven case.