• Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

EVERYONE READ: forum standards **UPDATED May 19th**

^^^
It doesnt. Apparently, the word "gay" goes over some people's heads. "It must mean homosexual or happy, because that's what the dictionary says..."

I just don't understand why anyone would care so much about it... IDK about anyone else, but I have better things to do with my time.

PS, if it offends someone, im sure djsim will edit it out, just for you.
 
I agree, using SWIM may be redundant or silly but I fail to see how that equates it to homosexuality or being merry.

It's used as slang for dumb or stupid in lots of cases. Why must you go by the dictionary on it?
 
^^^
It doesnt. Apparently, the word "gay" goes over some people's heads. "It must mean homosexual or happy, because that's what the dictionary says..."

I just don't understand why anyone would care so much about it... IDK about anyone else, but I have better things to do with my time.

PS, if it offends someone, im sure djsim will edit it out, just for you.
^
+1

And as far as OD standards go, the mods know what I think through my reporting ;).

I just don't feel there is much we can do about it. I do however like the:

  • "X number of reports = a thread is temporarily locked until a mod can assess it" idea. As well as
  • JC's pop-up idea - Before a Greenlighter posts (a new thread) in OD (or any sub-forum for that matter), a window should pop-up with all the pertinent links (ie. rules, mega thread directory, ect) as well as a short list of the most commonly closed threads (ie. smoking oxy, how long till I can dose my sub, ect, ect) as well as a predetermined link to to a thread that adequately answers each of those common questions.
I think combining those two ideas would cut down on ALOT of bullshit in here.
 
Last edited:
The mods aren't payed and this isn't their job. They volunteer for the good of the cause, thus by being "wannabe" mods you are only helping them. To expect a bunch of volunteers that are themselves users and addicts to police a forum 24/7 is unrealistic IMO.

By definition the mods are supposed to keep the forum in order. If the problem is that there aren't enough mods on regularly, make more mods.
 
^
We already have 5 mods + our sMod. I agree that not enough mods = not enough modding. But too many mods = lower quality mods, and in OD we can't really afford that.

OD has enough moderators IMO, adding mods just helps cover up the problem (dumbass threads). We need to start fixing it from the core (ie. trying to reduce the number of shitty threads, rather than just adding more mods to close them faster).
 
But too many mods = lower quality mods

I don't necessarily agree with that.

We need to start fixing it from the core (ie. trying to reduce the number of shitty threads

I do agree with that. So what is the core problem? Lazy users, who just want a quick answer, without having to wade through pages of information to get what they want?
 
I don't necessarily agree with that.

How can you not agree with that? Trust me, finding people who are actually qualified AND willing to mod OD is no easy task. You can't start giving unproven users a modstick in OD because the advice people give in OD can lead to death if the person is talking out of their ass. Its a reasonable assumption to make by new and old users alike that the moderators have a certain understanding and knowledge of what their talking about, so if they don't, that can cause some serious "issues" down the line.

I do agree with that. So what is the core problem? Lazy users, who just want a quick answer, without having to wade through pages of information to get what they want?

Yes, but new users not knowing the info is already out there is also a major issue as well.
 
How can you not agree with that? Trust me, finding people who are actually qualified AND willing to mod OD is no easy task. You can't start giving unproven users a modstick in OD because the advice people give in OD can lead to death if the person is talking out of their ass. Its a reasonable assumption to make by new and old users alike that the moderators have a certain understanding and knowledge of what their talking about, so if they don't, that can cause some serious "issues" down the line.

I would agree if it was a small community and hence having more mods unavoidably means choosing lower quality mods. Bluelight is large, though, and having more mods doesn't mean they have to be lower quality mods. Are you saying there aren't any more qualified and willing mods out there? I don't think the number of mods effects the quality of modding, but agree that the knowledge of the mod certainly does.

Yes, but new users not knowing the info is already out there is also a major issue as well.
So how do we rectify this? Some improvements have already been made with the directories, FAQs, etc. What to do next...?
 
I would agree if it was a small community and hence having more mods unavoidably means choosing lower quality mods. Bluelight is large, though, and having more mods doesn't mean they have to be lower quality mods. Are you saying there aren't any more qualified and willing mods out there? I don't think the number of mods effects the quality of modding, but agree that the knowledge of the mod certainly does.

I'm not saying there isn't anyone that could, and probably would do the job if it was needed. But heres the thing..

First of all, finding people to mod right now may not be the hardest thing to do. But easily finding people that are not only qualified and willing, but also willing to do the job for the next year+ straight makes things even harder. There are plenty of users on here they may have the knowledge, but might not also have the time. Or if they do have the time, they may not be able to make a long term commitment to moderating the forum. What is actually needed to be mod here is knowledge, willingness, long-term commitment, and enough free time to be a consistent regular poster. Are there people like that on here? Yeah probably a few, but my point here is just that there is alot more that goes into finding a good mod than most people may think.

Also, just by using basic logic it makes sense that the more mods we have, the worse they would be. Because in theory, they pick the best possible person for the job first, second best second, so on and so on. So if we have ten mods, then in theory , the 10th guy to get the job would only be 10th best option.

So how do we rectify this? Some improvements have already been made with the directories, FAQs, etc. What to do next...?
I already gave my opinion on this a few posts up in this thread:

I just don't feel there is much we can do about it. I do however like the:

  • "X number of reports = a thread is temporarily locked until a mod can assess it" idea. As well as
  • JC's pop-up idea - Before a Greenlighter posts (a new thread) in OD (or any sub-forum for that matter), a window should pop-up with all the pertinent links (ie. rules, mega thread directory, ect) as well as a short list of the most commonly closed threads (ie. smoking oxy, how long till I can dose my sub, ect, ect) as well as a predetermined link to to a thread that adequately answers each of those common questions.
I think combining those two ideas would cut down on ALOT of bullshit in here.
 
Also, just by using basic logic it makes sense that the more mods we have, the worse they would be. Because in theory, they pick the best possible person for the job first, second best second, so on and so on. So if we have ten mods, then in theory , the 10th guy to get the job would only be 10th best option.

I don't want to nitpick; we're kinda getting off topic here, but... the job doesn't go the the best person, because they are chosen on knowledge of the topics and quality contributions, not based on their skill or experience in modding a board. Kind of like a job interview where you show your degree but not your employment history.

Also, you're (correctly) stating that if you choose the 'best' of something from a sample, then each subsequent choice will return a 'worse' result. That is true, but as you increase your sample size (ie more users), the difference in quality in subsequent choices becomes smaller. There's a consistent relationship between sample size and quality of choice on subsequent picks. (also this is affected by not choosing the 'best' every time, like I explained above) :)



That said, I like the suggestions that have been made so far, and apologise for the slight derailment. :)
 
Last edited:
I don't want to nitpick; we're kinda getting off topic here, but... the job doesn't go the the best person because they aren't chosen on their skill or experience in modding a board, they are chosen on knowledge of the topics and a quality posting history. Kind of like a job interview where you show your degree but not your employment history.
Thats a good point, but thats why I said "in theory". Picking a mod actually isn't just based on knowledge and quality in post history. They actually do also look at people's ability to deal with/interact with others on the site, as well as what they find to be an appropriate thread based on reporting and comments made about certain threads. So they do have pretty good odds at picking the "best" possible person for the job IMO.

Also, you're (correctly) stating that if you choose the 'best' of something from a sample, then each subsequent choice will return a 'worse' result. That is true, but as you increase your sample size (ie more users), the difference in quality in subsequent choices becomes smaller. There's a relationship between sample size and quality of choice. (also this is effected by not choosing the 'best' every time, like I explained above) :)

Also a good point in general. But like I said, that sample size is actually alot smaller than you may think by the time it comes down to actually making someone a mod.

Also, polite debate is the best kind of derailment on here. And plus, we were kind of talking about the topic ;)
 
My point is bluelight IMO is a community. Just like irl it doesn't matter how many authority figures you add. Ultimately people do what they want and turning more members into mods isn't gonna solve people making crappy threads. I agree with JC, repetition is the best way and what better way to do that than an army of members saying UTFSE or take it to BDD.
 
Other Drugs currently has more staff than any other forum on Bluelight, I don't think we'll be adding any more staff soon :)

I think the current mods are all passionate about OD being the best forum it can be, and the best drug forum on BL, it's natural for mods to want their forum to be the best. Sometimes just adding more staff doesn't make that more likely though, with a larger group you run the risk of making the forum over-moderated. Also the more mods there are, the wider the extreme between mods who are more lenient compared to mods who are stricter.

This leads to frustration for posters who find themselves up against inconsistent decisions.

IMHO, a smaller, tight-knit group of staff running a forum will always work better than a larger, more disparate group thrown together to provide 24/7 coverage.

I think that's worth keeping in mind, the mods are here to serve you but they also have real lives, so help them out a bit and give them a forum where they can attend to real life while doing what needs to be done here at the same time. :)

Oh and thank you to the members who regularly report threads to bring them to the attention of staff when no one is around.
 
My point is bluelight IMO is a community. Just like irl it doesn't matter how many authority figures you add. Ultimately people do what they want and turning more members into mods isn't gonna solve people making crappy threads. I agree with JC, repetition is the best way and what better way to do that than an army of members saying UTFSE or take it to BDD.

It's hard to find a balance between a culture of users correcting others on 'bad' threads, and being a seeming hostile community.

The reason people post unnecessary threads is that they don't read what's already been written (or do, and ignore it). Do you expect them to read other 'bad' threads and then, seeing all the UTFSE comments, decide not to make their thread, when clearly they are not reading the guidelines/directories/Megathreads/FAQs?

I can see the UTFSE strategy working in that users would only post one 'bad' thread, then if all they get is UTFSE/read the rules and a lock/merge, they would get the idea (hopefully!). But this requires other users not to reply to the thread with anything but UTFSE, links to relevant search results, or suggestions to read the guidelines. And you still have users making one bad thread to start with.
 
Last edited:
Other Drugs currently has more staff than any other forum on Bluelight, I don't think we'll be adding any more staff soon :)

I think the current mods are all passionate about OD being the best forum it can be, and the best drug forum on BL, it's natural for mods to want their forum to be the best. Sometimes just adding more staff doesn't make that more likely though, with a larger group you run the risk of making the forum over-moderated. Also the more mods there are, the wider the extreme between mods who are more lenient compared to mods who are stricter.

This leads to frustration for posters who find themselves up against inconsistent decisions.

IMHO, a smaller, tight-knit group of staff running a forum will always work better than a larger, more disparate group thrown together to provide 24/7 coverage.

I think that's worth keeping in mind, the mods are here to serve you but they also have real lives, so help them out a bit and give them a forum where they can attend to real life while doing what needs to be done here at the same time. :)

Oh and thank you to the members who regularly report threads to bring them to the attention of staff when no one is around.
Yeah, thats another great point I didn't explore.

It doesn't bother me, but it is being used in a discriminatory fashion.
Haha, also true.
 
I think the popup before greenlighters can post is a great idea-- in all forums. It's not like it would prevent them from asking a question if necessary and being provided harm-reduction, if anything it would, often times, help them to get that information quickly. Also, when I was a greenlighter I would have been happy to get a polite little popup saying "hey, did you use the handy-handy search engine?" than annoyed bluelighters angrily telling me to UTFSE in a thread.
 
Using "gay" to mean "uncool" or "unnacceptable" or "looked down upon"? What is this, sixth grade

You must be one if those politically correct liberal hippies who make it so we can't call black people 'black' and gets offended by words that have no bearing on your life, you just need something to bitch about so you can act offended.
 
Using a slang term for someone's sexuality as an all-around derogatory negative/curse word is homophobic and offensive to anyone with good taste. Are you going to tell us that anyone who is offended by Eric Cartman's use of the 'alternative' definition of the word 'Jewish' as 'one who is cheap and niggardly' is a politically correct liberal hippie too?

You may hang out with the racist/homophobic crowds in real life, but this is the Bluelight, and we have minority groups here that are every bit as valuable as those of us who are white heterosexuals.
 
Top