That’s the Oilers’ first win this season with McDavid held off the scoresheet.

Never in doubt

Never in doubt!
#neverindoubt
#Oilers

Look, those two Oilers are going to get their goals. Nothing you can do about that. You just have to limit their chances.

The dual offensive juggernauts of Dickinson and Kapanen.

But also, Ingram needed to stop that.

Penalties will kill you.

So maybe don’t take the unnecessary ones.

Helps to not get worried when they don’t get a single shot attempt from the front.

The Ducks had 22 shot attempts but only 3 hit the net?

The dual offensive juggernauts of Dickinson and Kapanen.

Like, would I be surprised if he turned out to be some sort of BatPope? Yes… but my second thought would be “out of all the Popes, this one makes sense”.

I’m not a Pope expert, more of a casual Pope follower, so someone may correct me if I’m wrong… but out of all the Popes in history, I feel like this Pope has got to be like top 5% most likely to be a secret masked crime-fighting Pope superhero.

Ah I see what you mean. I did know about those changes and long-term, that’s beneficial to me, being in Sask.

Shifting the business model?

The fuel prices thing I get, but this problem I noticed before all that even.

Ah, my old nemesis: Venture Capital

Is this a more ‘Saskatchewan’ thing or a wider spread Westjet problem I wonder

[scientist looking through microscope in disbelief] mother of god... it's... it's a reverse milkshake duck

This is very much a privileged problem, of course. But there’s lots of things that impact air travel that are outside of a company’s control and I get that.

But the frequency of this seems like pretty bad management that can persist due to lack of competition.

So… what’s up with Westjet? Between myself and people I know, it seems like more than 50% of flights booked end up getting rescheduled by Westjet and usually pretty dramatically. Both international and domestic. Don’t remember that happening so often before.

I mean, yes, kids also still drink, smoke weed, and do all sorts of things. But if a large number of their friends aren’t online, that has an impact on how many of them do.

I admit to being skewed a bit as I look at things from a public health perspective first and foremost, which isn’t the only way to look at things.

I think that’s pretty niche and all people under 16 must have a guardian (or have one assigned by the state) who can advocate on their behalf on social media if it came to that. Plus, workers can and do organize on a number of platforms.

Yeah, I agree with these concerns. And agree with regulating the tech industry. But also think social media is bad for kids.

I agree, this is my concern as well. I like it in theory. Am concerned in practice.

Is it though? Like you can’t gamble, drive, drink, smoke weed, vote, or choose where you live under a certain age. Among other things. Is it really more substantive to be banned from posting on like 6 different apps?

Regarding social media bans based on age, I’m concerned about how this would work in practice.

In theory, though, speaking as a child psychiatrist, I think it would be a net positive for their mental health & it’s best done as widespread policy than leaving it to individual families.

Is it a Charter right to tweet?

Like, I’m being facetious but I ask that seriously too.

Obviously not all forms of expression are protected. And if there’s significant public health impact, should that still be protected? What if it was viewed the same as other addictions?

So I think this is a ridiculous framing because I don’t think any useful democratic debate happens on social media at any age.