That's an interesting way to look at it, and you're not wrong. The way I was considering it when I wrote the post was more along a consideration of the Golden Rule; that is, "drinking" is really only a danger to yourself (at least, to some degree; it is possible, I suppose, that you make decisions while under the influence that do effect others), whereas the other comment I was referring to is pretty encouraging active harm to other individuals. (Although, I suppose if you expect that that's the playing field, one could argue that it isn't a violation of the Golden Rule? That is, if it is "par for the course"? Nonetheless, it seems like a good way to ensure limited collective success, which is perhaps my real objection to it.)