Talk:Drunk geohash achievement

I strongly oppose this achievement. While I'm fine with people being drunk and I drink alcohol myself, providing an incentive to be drunk is wrong in so many ways. Getting to places drunk will in most cases involve participating in traffic, and alcohol accounts for a significant part of traffic fatalities (about one third in the USA, less in Germany and Austria) and traffic injuries; While I don't want to deny anybody the freedom to die drunk, I will not tolerate killing others while drunk. Even if you don't run anybody over on the way, getting to the exact spot often enough involves risky behaviour (down a steep incline to reach a spot in the wilderness; one step closer to the cliff to get that last 0.00001°...) and being drunk both impairs judgement and increases risk-taking. The health-related effects of alcohol should be well-known, also that more than one in ten people will be addicted to alcohol during their life; drinking incentives play a major part in the increase of alcohol dependency and external incentives are a major problem in the struggle of alcohol addicts to stay sober. I have seen lots and lots of patients that lost their health, their job, their family and the quality of their life to alcohol, also I've met enough of the affected family members. While I don't want to claim that going to a hashpoint drunk once will make anybody an alcoholic, it's the many tiny incentives like these that add up to a huge problem in society; That's why there are restrictions (at least in most European countries) on the advertisement for alcohol. While usually the geohashing achievements are used in a "don't take it if you don't like it" way, in this case I'm convinced that even the existence of this "achievement" is a mistake (we don't have a "Crime committing achievement" or a "Burglarize house to reach hashpoint achievement" either). micsnare, Du solltest eigentlich inzwischen alt genug sein um zu wissen, dass betrunken sein nicht "cool" ist. - Danatar (talk) 12:51, 30 April 2015 (EDT)

Oppose for the reasons Danatar laid out, plus it being a subjective achievement. Arlo (talk) 17:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I've moved this to rejected since there has been strong opposition, and nobody supported it in years in the first place. --Fippe (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)