Hey I came around and stopped ranting in every RC thread, it is the RC combo's or the ROAs which receive no warning that worry me especially when they can be deadly.
I'm glad you are trying to adjust a bit and appreciate it. I wouldn't justify what goes on in this forum in it's entirety and there are a lot of morally difficult issues which often revolve around that conservatist vs. libertarian dichotomy of perspectives, but there is another way to react. What would be helpful is if you would go in such a problematic RC combo thread you consider problematic and 1) summarize what makes you think the drugs of topic or combination there of could be deadly or particularly dangerous apart from the fact that we don't know much about it yet. 2) either write up an explanatory warning or 3) ask staff to help you do it. It can then serve as an example for other related topics and threads.
People operate under provisional information, actually the whose of science works like that (although I am not at all trying to pretend we are being scientists here) which means that we consider the premises: the only things we know to be true or to suggest certain things and for all else we step into the unknown. Even with classical psychedelics there is a lot we still don't know (for example about what are long-term effects and what are merely correlations) even if a long history of use counts for a lot. That history doesn't fully imply that we understand it!
Yes I am all for warning people about the fact that there are a lot of unknown factors and do think that we should put up announcements about that in for example our FAQ, maybe the Index (could be unpractical), NBOMe threads, and maybe more. Even if I think that it would not defer a huge portion of people, it is the right thing to do and it could actually make a difference. But there remains a portion of people who are still intent on taking these drugs and even some that are encouraged by the warnings of unknown because in their eyes it means novelty and pioneering. There is a part there that we will have to accept and people will have to take their own responsibility. Idealizing the world at that point is unhelpful and deeply painful because it means wanting unchangeable things to be different, potential for eternal agony (ok that is overdramatic). Note that I don't think it is all unchangeable, we can probably change it a bit but not completely.
Keep in mind these threads stay cached for a very long time, so if you had some warning with a caution sign at the top of the thread, that says something like this:
"At the time this thread was opened on bluelight.ru, the drug being discussed is/was new to the research community and does not have a credited safety profile, and it lacks data from human/clinical trials. Most information presented here is speculation and we advise all users/visitors who want to take these compounds that potential risk and hazard is elevated with drugs that are new on the market. The reason we allow and respond to these threads is we want everyone to be able to speak openly about drug use and we supply as much helpful information available to us when this thread was made. Play safe and ask further questions if necessary - Bluelight staff and community."
Then even if people pull up the thread 6 months from now they will understand the compound in question is new with limited researched and they might play a little more cautiously. Go read some of the Heroin threads they throw out warnings all the time to users asking ridiculous questions, why cant PD be the same? ( Granted there is not a caution sign or a permanent warning ) it is just other users and mods informing people taking Heroin about ALL of the risks not just casually blowing them off and denying good advice.
[..]
If you really need examples of what drugs need this warning I will be more than happy to supply a list for you.
I applaud this and invite others to jump in and add or change things about it before and after we start putting it up. Maybe let's create a thread for formulating announcements, and even the reasons why an announcement or warning needs to be put up somewhere.
Look I am more than happy to contribute to a better world here, when I can because unfortunately sometimes personal stuff gets in the way, but I'm gonna need some help. Of my dear fellow mods but also from the community. It is a bit unreasonable when a community shares a cry for help but an unwillingness to do any real work.
That is especially why I am offended when people are acting hysterical about things in the forum, but nobody is helping - if it's all problems and no solutions, what do you expect?
Its comments from mods like this that disturb me:
"A drug's age has nothing to do with its safety profile" - Transform
Not only is this incredibly false it is just reassuring all these users that there is nothing wrong with taking in a completely new and foreign substances.
This is probably not the right thread to go onto that, I think you should quote things from here in the Natural vs Synthetic debate Thread, which is somewhere in the Index.
In short: there are definitely special advantages to using drugs that have a long history of use but I really think you are failing to see the intricacies of what conclusions to draw from that - Transform has a very good point, you are overestimating history (which implies time more than events) and underestimating SAR which can help us predict that within a certain margin a new drug isn't always equally a question mark. New drugs that are completely new chemicals with no relatives, those I am fucking scared of for reasons similar to your rationale, but that hardly ever happens and instead we do have some information to go on and always quickly try to revise our premises when new data is presented.
psy997 is also hinting at such logical relations.
Lol! Don't even get me started on the ethnobotanical market that plague headshops and livers world wide! I will admit I should have made myself a little more clear and you are right there is a time when RC ----> No longer RC. There is a time period but none of us know what that is considering it is such a new market. I would say the classic 2C's might be rounding the corner into this category same with BZP and mephedrone. I'm not saying they are safe but they do have a history and alot of people have taken them. Even LSZ and AL-LAD have been around but they were hidden for quite some time, it is tricky because Mephedrone has been ingested more than LSZ, However mephedrone has been around for a shorter period but there is still more evidence of human use so which one would fit in the no longer research chem category, that is confusing I know. However there is no drug committee so we all need to discipline ourselves and each other.
This free rain thing where people think they can just ingest every compound on the market is disturbing and can be very hazardous to the user. Can you really deny this is happening? Shulgin is a genius but he also commonly admits he has tripped thousands of times, unfortunately I think that is influencing others to do the same which could be deadly ( I understand he did not intend it to be this way ), I mean come on there is and always will be only one Sasha I don't know why others feel the need to ingest all these substances he did it because it was his path and he needed the trials there to publish, he did what he did for science not recreational use ...
I am trying to be as polite as possible however I am not just going to be scared away because mods keep telling me im wrong its like some people are forgetting how many guest's and users use BL and trust this site, I would say it is the most trusted website on earth for illicit drugs.
I'll quit bringing this up I have said all I need to say for now. You guys are the mods I guess it is up to you how you want to portray this website. If Im really that out of line feel free to send me a PM.
BTW Apologies for blowing up PD it is what I view most commonly everything I have said goes for ED and OD (opiods/benzos new to the RC market).
EB
Like I said: find the appropriate threads if you are ranting or making a point. It's hard to take your criticism or feedback on the forum seriously if you don't use the forum like we ask you to. I tried to address a few things here in short but please take it elsewhere - quote me from here and copy, all the same, if you must.
Cor, this thread blew up.
I do think the B&D thread system has inherent failings. Unfortunately I also think it would be very hard to solve this without allowing the forum to become disorganised rapidly. As it is I mostly just respond to reports as they come in and read my subscribed threads because I don't have the time to browse.
Agreed. I think it is better to only merge threads into B&Ds after page 2 and then it serves as a way to archive and string together scraps that are all about the exact same topic. I doubt that leaving those scraps / threads separate would make it easier to find some specific thing you would be looking for unless you have some details to go on. And if you have some hints you can also feed them into the search engines.
Not sure what other objections there are to the B&Difying and subthreadifying and general structured organisation of the forum?
I also struggled to find the PD index. I think it might be worth stickying.
Not trying to sound like an ass-hole here but do you see this link at the top of PD? :
A drug's age has literally nothing to do with its safety profile. Was LSD the most dangerous drug on the scene a week after its discovery? Is opium a very safe drug?
Good. Please do not be discouraged by the debate. If I was right more than 50% of the time then I'd set up on Wall St. for a month and then leave a very rich man!
I get that you're worried about BL encouraging drug use, but if people conclude that something is a good idea from reading the facts, who are we to say their opinion is wrong and ours is right. What we want here is a safe place to discuss such topics so that people can make their own decisions with the best information available. To try and discourage drug use by keeping quiet about it is foolish IMHO.
There are arguments to be made for both sides: with opium at least we know relatively a lot about it's safety. So this is not only about safety but about awareness of risk and danger.
And yeah even though this is serious and there are issues we need addressing we are very happy that you are giving feedback and that we can talk about things and try to resolve them. This is never a fight where we defend our point whether we are right or wrong, I hope we can find out what's right and true together... dialectically, or whatever the hell the poly version of that is.
About attempts to repress people's drug use rather than to warn about facts, yes think we rammed that point home by now, correct me if I'm wrong.
