• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    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?

wazza

wazza

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 24, 2001
Messages
4,619
Hi there all,
A user sent me an email today with their opinion that 'smacky' should be used as a term for strong mdma effects (when you're on your arse and just want to talk, sit back and enjoy the love etc).
I have been removing the term 'smacky' because I feel this is one step in helping inexperienced people stop thinking heroin is in pills (for the norm). They thought a discussion should be opened on bluelight and I wholeheartly agree, I was getting around to do this one day (been busy at work) but this email jogged me along.
So, what do you guys think? I have been replacing 'smacky' with basically "put me on my arse; just wanted to sit down and enjoy the loved up feelings; etc etc" in place of "smacky" for mdma effects on pillreports.
Please also add why you think it should or shouldn't be replaced and if you can think of something else/better, please say so! :)
*EDIT* Also, they discussed if I was taking out smack references, I should go all the way and remove the 'speedy' terms. This is a snip of what I emailed back in reference to that.
Regarding your speedy comment, we really do not know if
meth/amphetemines have been included in the pill because yes, MA in MDMA
is methamphetemine but the way the body metabolizes it, you may or may
not get the 'chargey' effect of mdma. Also, meth has been found to be
included in some/lot? of pills because it also stimulates the serotonin
release in your brain therefore helping the pill to feel stronger on
less cheaper ingredients. That's why I would not take out the comment.
Have you checked the sites http://www.dancesafe.org/labtesting/ and
http://www.ecstasydata.org/ as a lot of pills contain either
meth/speed/mdma/(other chems) or a mixture of them. So I don't see speedy
should really be left out as it doesn't really _confuse_ users to a great
degree (in my view of course).
I would like to thank the user for bringing this to my attention and actually bothering to email me, which is nice. THANKS..
[ 11 September 2002: Message edited by: wazza ]
Click to expand...
 
In my opinion smacky is a weak adjective to describe the feeling of MDMA. It's misleading, inappropriate, and it doesn't describe any of the pleasurable properties of MDMA. It also contributes to the urban myth that there is heroin in pills.
Good work for deleting all references to it on pillreports. Surely people have better imaginations than to say "man it was smacky"... that sounds so trite, unintelligent and non-descript.
BigTrancer :)
 
I say get rid of the word smacky, for the reason wazza stated - to remove the notion of there being heroin pills.
I don't however have a problem with 'speedy' as speedy is also an adjective.
 
I totally agree with everything said so far, keep the term smacky pertaining to smack(heroin). Otherwise it just confuses people and of course gives the dastardly media more ammo against MDMA. The classic effects of a strong dose of unadulterated MDMA, which people refer to as smacky, should either be renamed 'MDMA-like' or something completely crazy like laa-laa-tronical. Agree with baby doc speedy isn't too bad an adjective and most of the people who describe pills as speedy have actually had speed, making speedy at least in terms of qualitative experience an accurate descriptor of effects.
[ 11 September 2002: Message edited by: Tabernacle ]
 
Agreeed with all above aswell. It does make everyone think there is heroin is in pills...."put me on my arse" is a much better way of saying it was a strong MD pill...keep doing what your doing I reckon. :)
 
i fail to understand why mongy just wont catch on.
Most people understand it and it has no references to other drugs.
Smackey and cokey are shocking terms, thankfully the second one has almost disappeared.
Although it amuses me the number of people who STILL ask "what base are these pills?"
aha... ;)
 
Eye. The eye's have it.
Generally I just use 'floored' for the intitial MDMA hit, or 'mongy' for a low quality MDMA pill that may have been cut with K.
It's funny how people say, 'Oh man, my pill was full of coke' and they look at me wierd when I smirk and say, 'Woah, was the pill the size of your fist?'.
 
I completely and utterly disagree.(and not just to be different)
The fact that the term is technically supposed to apply to heroin is irrelevant in my opinion. If you were to enter any rave or similar venue, where quantities of ecstasy are being consumed, the term “smacky” would be widely used and widely understood.
I would be willing to bet (though not that much, I’m a student with a shit job ;) ), that the majority of people who eat ecstasy in Australia (or at the very least Sydney) and who use the term “smacky” don’t even realise that it originally was only meant as a term for heroin.
I used the word for over two years without any inclination of what it technically referred to.
It’s the colloquial language, just because the word used to, and technically means one thing, doesn’t mean that it still does in the majority of peoples understandings.
I think they trying to take a “semantic high-ground” is a very bad idea, unless bluelight wants to come across as being only for elitist drug-takers.
If it wants to “serve the community” then it has to adopt its language.
The term isn’t that bad, it’s no worse than any of the other of the plethora of drug terminology.
Maybe it used to refer only to heroin, in my opinion now it doesn’t. It’s a very, very common phrase/word/term. It’s what’s used by the wider community, so in my opinion it’s what bluelighters should be able to use, if they feel the need!!
Trying to forcibly change common terminology, is pointless and confusing, and that confusion could easily be dangerous.
Like it or not, “smacky” is here and it’s here to stay.
 
Mr.Happ-E: I have to disagree with you now :) I believe the term "smacky" does lead to people believing there is heroin in their pills. The rumour is out there already, and when most people hear the word "smack" they'll think of heroin. The only reason it is used is because people believe this is what heroin would feel like. Why not just use the term "mashed" or something like that, keep the smack references to smack.
As for using the term "Speedy", if a pill is speedy, it's likely to have speed in it. Whereas we all know, a "smacky" people most likely wont have smack in it.
The whole point to this website is to educate, and part of education is to quash rumours. One of the ways of doing this is to get rid of the idea of heroin in pills.
 
I'd be willing to bet the majority of people taking pills and using the term smacky also associates smack with heroin.
As its been said numerous times before we are here to educate or at least try to educate those who choose to take illicit substances. Trying to make people use different words to describe what their feeling in the hope of preventing confusion of other less knowledgeable users who may hear them talking about these "full sik smacky pills man...." which only keeps the myth alive.
There are plenty of other words they could use instead. I've always hoped 'trolleyed' would catch on... ;)
 
Don't know where my post went but the general jist is I prefer to use the term "smack daddie" for a MDEA like pill. So would people consider this to imply heroin in the pill?
 
Yeah I much prefer to use the term 'floored' as well.
All credit to you Wazza for trying to rid pillreports of the dreaded 'S' word but I think it's going to be a bit of an uphill battle as that word seems to be very ingrained in the pill-popping culture now.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't keep trying though!
 
If you were to enter any rave or similar venue, where quantities of ecstasy are being consumed, the term "smacky" would be widely used and widely understood.
That doesn't make it RIGHT. We're in the business of providing information which is fact, and to that end, we must try to set a good example and encourage people not to use terms which are misleading and incorrect.
BigTrancer :)
Click to expand...
 
If it wants to “serve the community” then it has to adopt its language.
WRONG!!!
we are serving the community by educating people on the RIGHT language, and there is no doubt about what is right when it comes to this issue.
Maybe it used to refer only to heroin, in my opinion now it doesn’t. It’s a very, very common phrase/word/term. It’s what’s used by the wider community, so in my opinion it’s what bluelighters should be able to use, if they feel the need!!
What about the MUCH wider community; i dont care whats going on in our little insignificant illicit world. i care about what the media, police, governments and my parents think. They dont know what a "smackey" pill feels like, they dont know what any pill feels like!! To them smack = heroin.
And thats what matters. Look at the bigger picture please!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
One more in the camp of Mr Happ-E. His arguments are sound IMHO.
If we are to reach the harm minimisation message out to the masses, the first step is to speak their language. By demanding they speak yours is akin to the colonials of yesteryear demanding the native "barbarians" to speak English only. Are we more concerned with harm minimisation or with intelligence? Whilst true that it has been a long time since we started "correcting" the lingo, does it mean that those that do not adopt it should be condemned as being dumb and hence unworthy of information that may save their lives? Or perhaps reprimanded as one would a misbehaving puppy? I think this attitude just smacks ;) of vainglorious basking in one's self-proclaimed intelligence and eliteness.
To allow the term "speedy" and not "smacky" is just plain hypocritical. True that speed/meth/etc are found in a significant proportion of pills, but a user's description of a pill being "speedy" is no indication of such. Or rather, a pill that does not contain the above substances may still be described thus. If one term needs to be changed, then so does the other. Let's not have double standards shall we?
Yes, we should set an example, try to prevent misinterpretation by the masses and the media, etc. This is all well and good, but as we should know by now, if the masses/media chooses to misinterpret, whether unintentionally or more often than not otherwise, a simple exclusion of a word is not going to stop them. If you choose to not use the term "smacky" good on you for setting an example. However, please refrain from disparaging another for not adopting YOUR point of view.
I have been using ecstasy for years now and know that the chances of a pill containing heroin is close to zero. BUT it is not. My preferred term of choice is "smacky" whether you like it or not, yet will not insist you use my terminology. Let's not be lazy and demand others adopt our lingo. The failure of "mongy", "trolleyed", whatever, is an indication that the eradication of the term is not going to happen anytime soon. Instead, let us do what we are supposed to do and that is MINIMISE HARM THROUGH EDUCATION, not acting all superior.
 
Originally posted by syke:

To allow the term "speedy" and not "smacky" is just plain hypocritical. True that speed/meth/etc are found in a significant proportion of pills, but a user's description of a pill being "speedy" is no indication of such. Or rather, a pill that does not contain the above substances may still be described thus. If one term needs to be changed, then so does the other. Let's not have double standards shall we?

It's not a double standard, mdxx is also a form of amphetamine, so describing a pill as speedy indicates that it could contain amphetamine, methamphetamine or mdxx. The term does assist in indicating what drugs the pill contains. The problem is that many people do think that the term smacky is also describing the drug that is in the pill. And it does not assist harm reduction to use a slang term for one drug to describe another drug.
It does feel a bit weird hearing that peoples posts have been edited for using the word though.
Click to expand...
 
"Speedy" pills feel like speed (amphetamine), but "smacky" pills don't feel like smack (heroin). So there's the problem.
Plus, there is often speed in pills, but there's never smack in them (don't go quoting Dancesafe on me either, it's so close to zero that it might as well be never).
The fundamental problem here is that when people refer to "smacky" pills, they usually don't have any frame of reference to what real heroin feels like. I don't believe that bluelight should cater to the lowest common denominator by using language that is misleading and false, just because it's common street slang. Everyone who uses the word "smacky" will understand just as well when people say "floored" or "mashed". It's not like we need the term smacky to cross language barriers - there are perfectly workable alternatives with far fewer ambiguities.
I'd be willing to bet that for every person that uses the term "smacky" to describe a good MDMA pill, there's another that genuinely thinks there's they've consumed heroin. I've heard "smacky" used in both highly positive and in highly negative tones. So how can we tell what the person means? If half the people think it means one thing, and the other half thinks it means another, then in my mind the word isn't doing a good enough job of conveying a meaning.
As for the actual editing out of references - that should be taken on a case by case basis. But it should definitely be discouraged.
 
Aaargh. Left this reply for a while and pleo comes with guns blazing ;) . Time to edit.
Originally posted by *chaoscat*:

It's not a double standard, mdxx is also a form of amphetamine, so describing a pill as speedy indicates that it could contain amphetamine, methamphetamine or mdxx. The term does assist in indicating what drugs the pill contains. The problem is that many people do think that the term smacky is also describing the drug that is in the pill. And it does not assist harm reduction to use a slang term for one drug to describe another drug.
It does feel a bit weird hearing that peoples posts have been edited for using the word though.
Agreed on your point about people thinking "smacky" is referring to the drug in the pill. This is why we need to educate them on the probable content of their pills, not change their lingo.
However, is "speedy" not similiarly using the slang term for one drug to describe another? I guess it depends on what is understood by "speed" which is in itself a street name. By your argument, would all MDxx pills then, not fall under the category of being "speedy"?
Pleo, close to zero is still NOT zero, hence NEVER is too absolute. Apart from the dancesafe case, what about pills from regions where testing is not common practise, or even plausible? Just because there has not been a documented case you can access does not mean it does not exist. It is up to you to believe whether I am speaking out of my arse ;) .
I do agree with you on that "speedy" pills feel like speed while "smacky" pills do not feel like heroin. Also agreed that "smacky" leaves room for discrepancies. However, this becomes a matter of semantics, and proves nothing as far as how appropriate a term is. :)
[ 11 September 2002: Message edited by: syke ]
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top