I find it mildly infuriating that some coworkers think entering a break room gives them license to play loud music over speakers, use obscene language (especially to and about other coworkers), and disrupt the fifteen minutes of peace and quiet some of us crave in the workplace.
I also can’t stand the fact that smokers can take unlimited ‘breaks’ whenever they please just to come back stinking up an entire room with their smoke.
It depends on how often they use their drug and how they act about it. If you can’t function and treat people like shit because you haven’t had your coffee/tea yet, you’re a drug addict.
This is an emotionally manipulative tactic, and not a great look. It’s no different than calling copyright infringement “theft”, abortion “murder”, or someone who speeds a “criminal”.
Note that you’re not wrong. People that get cranky if they don’t get enough caffeine are probably feeling some withdrawals from it, and caffeine is a drug, but calling those people “drug addicts” leverages the emotional connotation from it’s more colloquial usage. If you can’t support your stance without emotional manipulation, you don’t have much of a stance, yeah?
Who am I manipulating? It’s just my opinion.
You attempted to manipulate anyone that reads your comments into agreeing with your opinion.
Don’t play dumb. It’s also not a good look.
No, I don’t expect people to agree with me. I know my opinion is very unpopular. I don’t care.
Not unpopular here matey!
Then there’s no reason to be emotionally manipulative. If you were being honest right now, there would have been no reason to use the term “because they’re drug addicts” in your comment. The gist of the comment doesn’t change when that phrase is removed. It’s just not as emotionally manipulative.
My opinion is that they are drug addicts. My opinion is also that being a drug addict is not something that should grant someone special privileges. How is that “emotionally manipulative”? I am not manipulating anyone.
I already explained this to you. Do you really need me to link to a comment further up this chain?
I explained why your explanation was wrong. Do you really need me to link to a comment further up this chain?