solistus
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 2,472
Your waiting list section still doesn't make sense. The rules don't apply, obviously, since it includes things that don't pass requirement 4. Clearly this section, at the very least, is totally subjective and based on your opinions and not any stated guidelines. Why call it a section of the list when it breaks the rules you just defined for said list? It's not "like a waiting list" unless you're waiting for some of these plants to evolve a psychoactive compound and then develop a long history of usage after said evolution. I guess you're thinking long term, then?
Why does it need to have been used by both "ancient cultures" and "westerns" to be on the list? At least this gives more definite standards than #2, but those standards seem completely arbitrary.
To sum up since I guess you were too lazy to read my posts before and reply to them in any form: you still haven't actually defined safe, long history of use, effective psychoactive or historical and cultural importance.
The points of defining rules for what does and doesn't count are to make it more objective and to limit it to some meaningful set of plants that might be useful to someone. Your list accomplishes neither. As I've already pointed out, the list you posted doesn't meet the rules you posted anyway, since you include some pretty unsafe substances like tobacco and I doubt every plant on that list has a documented history of both ancient and western use (there is no evidence of ancient use of HBWR seeds before, for example, as you yourself pointed out not too long ago in the thread on that very topic).
If you want to define the list as best you can, maybe you can start by reading the posts from me and other people and actually taking those arguments into consideration in some demonstrable fashion.
Why does it need to have been used by both "ancient cultures" and "westerns" to be on the list? At least this gives more definite standards than #2, but those standards seem completely arbitrary.
To sum up since I guess you were too lazy to read my posts before and reply to them in any form: you still haven't actually defined safe, long history of use, effective psychoactive or historical and cultural importance.
The points of defining rules for what does and doesn't count are to make it more objective and to limit it to some meaningful set of plants that might be useful to someone. Your list accomplishes neither. As I've already pointed out, the list you posted doesn't meet the rules you posted anyway, since you include some pretty unsafe substances like tobacco and I doubt every plant on that list has a documented history of both ancient and western use (there is no evidence of ancient use of HBWR seeds before, for example, as you yourself pointed out not too long ago in the thread on that very topic).
If you want to define the list as best you can, maybe you can start by reading the posts from me and other people and actually taking those arguments into consideration in some demonstrable fashion.