• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

RFD: Do you agree removing 'smack' reference is good or bad in pillreports?

Hmm... Biscuit... I respectfully disagree. :) On the internet, the distinction between out there, in here and on the street is v--e--r--y blurred indeed. In here IS out there.
This also raises the question of who has ownership of Bluelight and Pillreports - I would argue that no particular group does, or that everyone who accesses these sites does.
Which includes people with whom one disagrees.
I don't think any one person or group can triumph in this debate, but I think it's good that we're having it.
 
Not only do the owners own the site, but the Moderators run the site; thats why we have them. And wazza is one of these people and he was asking for our opinion on how we think the site he is helping to run, should be run.
I understand your disagreement but that again is a narrow view of things. The people and whats said might be the same between in here and out there but u must look to the FORM of whats said and the MEDIUMS they are communicated in.
In Australia the law (whether its property law, contract law, defamation etc) draws very clear distinctions between something made in writing and something that is simply communicated orally by a person. (excluding sound recordings)
What people say to a small number of people or even a large number of people is very different than putting something in writing on a public message board.
Whilst Bluelight is not the High Court i hope u can see the reason written communication is always treated very differently to oral communication.
Written can reach an indiscriminate number of people (esp on the internet), including people the author never intended it to reach, and until its removed from the public record it remains indefinitely for people to view.
 
According to Abygale's spiel in the Social forum's guidelines, Bluelight is not a democracy.
Therefore I guess the owners, admins & mods can do what they see fit regarding the making of decisions like these without having to take our opinions into account.
So basically, for the sake of the arguement, even if we all wanted the word "smacky" to remain in Pillreports, they could take it out if they wanted to, and there would be very little we could do about it. So ultimately it's probably a pointless discussion! :\
 
OK, well first of, have there been any beginners who have actually asked any of you if theres heroin in the Pill cos they feel "floored"? No one has ever asked me this, and the thought never crossed my mind that when i used the term smackey, it meant that there could be heroin in it! I do tend to use the term "smack bang on the floor" which i guess is a combination of a bit of both terms.
If you keep telling people not to use the word smackey they most likely will because you keep reminding them of the word.
Before you correct someone next time, tell them WHY it's prefered these days to say "floored" for example.
 
OK, well first of, have there been any beginners who have actually asked any of you if there’s heroin in the Pill cos they feel "floored"?
This is the main reason I have been removing the term "smacky" Several posts on pillreports have actually stated 'think little bit of heroin due to not moving' or 'theres coke in these for sure. Very chargey'. From the context these were taken out of, it was not a sarcastic post either; people thinking there were heroin and/or cocaine in pills.
Also I have put in 'great quotes' a while back in aus social how some random clubber said to me that the coke in her pill was really getting her going. Also friends have stated to me how they have had 'ice' in pills and other assorted 'harder drugs' in their pills to kick them off.
Everything I would like to explain has been said so well from Biscuit, so I'll just re-confirm what he has said. I am thinking of the bigger picture and how pillreports.com can reach a vast amount of people including people of not the intended audience.
Written can reach an indiscriminate number of people (esp on the internet), including people the author never intended it to reach, and until its removed from the public record it remains indefinitely for people to view.
^^ Couldn't have said it any better ^^
So basically, for the sake of the argument, even if we all wanted the word "smacky" to remain in Pillreports, they could take it out if they wanted to, and there would be very little we could do about it. So ultimately it's probably a pointless discussion!
Regarding this statement, it is not a pointless discussion as we are all putting out our views and maybe learning some information that we did not earlier know. Such for example, there are a small amount of people who think heroin and/or cocaine are in pills because I have personally heard people comment with such statements about what they think were in their pills.
Just hope people realise why this is being done, to try to stop misinformation from reaching people, both the drug and non-drug taking population. It might only be a little bit but I believe every little bit counts.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Wazza, that statement was in reply to the last few posters, including D&AWG, who were discussing who would triumph in the debate.
I certainly didn't mean the whole thread was a waste of time. On the contrary, I thought it was one of the more interesting debates and thought it was great that you asked our opinion on your actions.
Sorry I didn't make myself clear, I'll remember to use a quote next time :)
 
rayda: oops, my bad. :)
On topic, regarding this post at http://www.pillreports.com/viewpill.php3?sub=-1&area=3&id=28291 is a good example why I am trying to remove slang terms.
*EDIT* Hmm then again, I would love to see a GC test of these dolphins. Could be placebo, actual cocaine in the pills or anything else. But if so, WHY PUT COKE IN SUCH A SMALL PILL? (No need to answer, it's rhetorical)
[ 25 September 2002: Message edited by: wazza ]
 
waz: didn't you hear about that time a guy came up to me at earthcore with a pill to test, saying it was cokey, and i bet him it wasn't. except when itested it with a cobalt tester it went blue, meaning it did in fact have cocaine in it (or pcp maybe).
so yeah, don't be so smug about what is an isn't in pills."smacky" and "cokey" as adjective for a subjective experience is misleading, but saying a pill has coke in it different. it is probably wrong but it may be right.
 
jb: cept the guy who said that probably pressed the pills himself to know that :)
 
JB: As I said in my post > "Hmm then again, I would love to see a GC test of these dolphins. Could be placebo, actual cocaine in the pills or anything else. But if so, WHY PUT COKE IN SUCH A SMALL PILL? (No need to answer, it's rhetorical)"
I am saying there could be cocaine in that pill, but if there is, WHY? What 'real' effects of putting a small amount of coke in a pill (as we know the pill isn't the size of an anzac biscuit) do they hope to achieve. Not to mention the cost of doing this (for little to zero effects).
And yes, I heard about the EC test. I'm not saying there is no heroin or cocaine in pills, but trying to dispel the thought that they are in there as a normal additive. I've been stating that throughout my posts I thought already.
 
Hi Guys, Im probably stating the obvious here as I know a lot of you are well informed. My personal opinion in regards to the word "smacky" is how can anyone honestly think that chemists would waste H and put it in pills. Pills are cut with speed (used for its stimulant properties) & K and DXM (used for halucenogic properties). People use the word smacky to describe the lethargy produced by some Es that are cut with too much K or DXM and has nothing got to do with H at all. This is a good thread, as hopefully it will inform people that there is no H in E's.
 
Pills are cut with speed (used for its stimulant properties) & K and DXM (used for halucenogic properties).
I don't think that's right at all actually...
Though there are others here who can far better inform you otherwise than I can, so I might just leave it.
Sorry, I haven't been to Bluelight for ages, and plum forgot I had even made that post in the first place...
I think I've said my bit, and I will probably leave it at that. I still think what I said stands, and I still support it.
It was a long read through this whole topic, but interesting none the less. I also thought the first post by the responder to that pill reports message ( http://www.pillreports.com/viewpill.php3?id=27982&area= ) further supports the exact thing I was saying.
I thought Skye's points were very valid, and I'm pleased I wasn't just left to be fried :) (thanx to those who didn't leave me on my lonesome! ;) )
I'm not entirely sure now why I felt the incentive to post again :/
I guess it was just to say that I still stand by what I said!
I can completely understand the other side of the coin in this argument, but I just feel it's a bad idea.
Anyway, I've said my bit. Seasons greetings to you all.
Click to expand...
 
A big B*U*M*P due to a lot of discussion happening in pillreports.com and not here due to this particular topic!
I still think 'smacky' description should be changed due to people outside of the pill scene seeing this and may be led to believe that heroin can and is in pills (for the normal).
 
Yup, in the interests of clarity, kill "smacky".
I thought I had educated my friends pretty well on the subject of "ecstasy", but overheard one telling someone that he didn't like "trip-based" e's. I damn near screamed at him.
 
Haha, my sister...MY OWN SISTER! after having a yellow rolex exclaimed to me that it was "full of coke"
I almost slapped her. I reconsidered and proceeded to explain to her that the "cokey" feeling she was referring to was actually the effects of a strong dose of MDMA. She honestly believed that because she didn't feel the need to dance and had a great time talking to people...that this meant there was coke in the pill. Poor deluded sis.
 
wazza.....are you “stirrin’ the pot” again mate?
well as i stated before i reckon “smacky” should remain....i fuckin love it and not just for arguement sake.
in my parts of sydney "smacky" is a generic term for a state of being....when you have taken some good mdma and are well and truly “fuckin smacked-out man”. its describes a state of being....... not whats in a pill.
unfortunately wazza...... smacky is here to stay :)
[ 22 January 2003: Message edited by: lorrett ]
 
to me, when i say that a pill is smacky, it means that it was like a smack in the face. it put me on the ground, not wanting to get up and just being..well....smacked out!
i don't use smacky/smacked that much though, i usualy use the good old, "oh man, i'm fucked off my nut!", and instead of calling a pill smacky, i will say, "it put me on my ass".
anyways, it think smacky is here to stay, and there aint nothing we can do about it, except educate people one what a smacky pill is!
 
anyways, it think smacky is here to stay, and there aint nothing we can do about it, except educate people one what a smacky pill is!
What a so-called "smacky" pill is: MDMA-based "ecstasy" tablet.
What a so-called "smacky" pill isn't: Smacky.
BigTrancer :D
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top