• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

The Future of ADD

I'm only an occasional poster here, and my credentials are certainly "advanced", but I think a lot of sense has been said here - especially Hammilton's post above, although it would seem tricky to regulate the "ethical direction" of certain lines of questioning.

Perhaps what would help is simply faster and stricter moderation? Moving threads to more appropriate forums (there have been several today) or closing those that merit it swiftly might deter the wrong kinds of post.
 
The original question by Nuke was:

nuke said:
How many people want us to start killing all the threads that do not pertain to data with scientific integrity (either their own or from the literature) and to try to elevate the general intelligence of ADD through that route?
Click to expand...

Obviously, this thread has produced some more elaborate answers. I would be interested in a response by the ADD-mods, Nuke, Vecktor and lately Ebola (as it looks like), what they think about the last statements.
 
kill the stupid threads, eventually the frequency of shit threads will lower, but not having read things that annoy you in their emptiness of interest would be priceless.

i'm not as "advanced" as other posters here lacking a chemistry education, but i like to make an effort to learn new things as i'm sure do many others, reading rubbish is filling my brain with useless drivel and negates the whole reason why i come to this part of bluelight.
 
It is not as simple as closing all "stupid" questions. Sure, your teacher lied when stating," there are no stupid questions", but we need to be discerning here.......
 
negrogesic said:
It is not as simple as closing all "stupid" questions. Sure, your teacher lied when stating," there are no stupid questions", but we need to be discerning here.......
Click to expand...

fine, but a lot of the problem threads are quite stupid, while at the same time being problematic in other ways. maybe a better way to put it is close threads where the questions are not based in any kind of factual information.

surely bdd is for the "stupid" questions:\

thats one reason i dont ever go in there any more
 
As mentioned in this thread,
One big problem we're having is that a lot of the smarter members here have been apparently providing free consulting work to marginally (or completely) illegal companies who would like to make lots of research chemicals to sell to people to get high on. And, basically, if a pharmaceutical company were to ask the same things of us, they would also give us thousands or tens of thousands of dollars while introducing new drugs to the public (with probably horrible side effects). This is multiplied by the fact that these drugs tend to create more health problems than the solve, compared to real pharmaceuticals.

I don't know if there's an easy answer to this aside from sticking to low abuse drug class discussions like psychedelics and... er, psychedelics, and otherwise harm reduction. Meanwhile, less well informed people have been flooding the forum with generally terrible ideas of new drugs to make, which is also a bad thing if companies start to pick up on those.

Not sure there's an easy answer to fixing this!
 
This bothers me a lot as I have a selection of compounds id love a decent opinion on. Sadly im scared they get ripped of and kill people.
 
nuke, why not work on a sort of moderator ran journal of sorts, say... once a month maybe? with an overview of the more intelligent questions, responses and ideas. it would push discussion towards certain topics, it would encourage more intelligent posting as people would want their ideas to be included in there, and it would focus on the more credible side of add. It would also increase add's credibility to outsiders or newcomers, and it would distinguish it from other sections of the site. it may even encourage a return of a greater number of intelligent types with phds and the what not.

Im not going to lie. as a lurker myself as i dont really know what im talking about, but i enjoy a good read, i would be disappointed if add became restricted or something. in fact i would probably leave bluelight tbh...

plus, you would be directing the more lazy capitalist idea-theifs to subjects of your choosing. looking through a bulletin or collection or whatever is much easier than trawling through threads, so they would probably just look there. this would introduce at least some minimal form of censorship... albeit indirect.
 
Last edited:
Some random, unsorted thoughts:

  • I think, at least in the past few months, the mods have been doing a pretty decent job of weeding out the crap threads - two today have been moved to other more basic forums even.
  • I think it's pretty obvious what an Advanced type topic is: if it asks something science/biochemistry based, or something above and beyond simple drug-taking questions. Or simply just thought-provoking topics on theoretical psychopharmacology. That stuff is fun. I think the newb threads that go something like "What is (RS)-2-methylamino-1-(4-methylphenyl)propan-1-one? Halp." need to stop, unless the OP him/herself can add something to the discussion and give us something interesting to discuss.
  • On the topic of focusing on harm reduction, ADD is mostly a "hobby" forum really; harm reduction is basically handled by the rest of the website in the focus forums.
  • That "Is Alcohol a Drug?" thread should have been put to sleep from the beginning. However, it has sparked a mostly intelligent discussion about inhalant method of action, so I guess it's serving a purpose.
  • The theoretical new drugs threads are fun, but if we're actually afraid of giving vendors ideas, well, that's why we have the other, blacker website for. I wouldn't mind never seeing those kinds of threads here again.

I'm kind of rambling without a main point, so let me try to make one: I think purposely trying to moderate your way into a more intelligent forum won't necessarily work. The posters themselves need to step up and post more thought-provoking material. I think once an example is set, the general intelligence of the discussion will elevate naturally. For the most part, we still have several intelligent posters, and this is still the most traveled forum on Bluelight for me nowadays. I love it. I haven't noticed that severe of a drop in intelligence. We can always do better though, and I'm glad these topics exist so we can shoot ideas back and forth.
 
The way I view ADD is that it's the place I go when I have a question that has no chance in hell of being properly answered in BDD. Personally, I don't think threads should have to start out particularly scientific as long as they are asking for some sort of scientific or "advanced" answer.

As for censoring the drugs we're allowed to talk about, I think that move would only hurt this forum further. Even if we stop giving RC companies ideas, there are still other sites that will continue to, and many of our valuable posters will likely flee to those sites and release the information regardless. In my mind, a vendor shouldn't be blamed for selling something dangerous, as long as they are selling it openly and honestly. The responsibility lies in the hands of the users to determine what they should and shouldn't take. However, I am 100% against vendors selling substances disguised as other substances and marketing products like bath salts to the general public without giving the true ingredients or the purity of the ingredients.
 
killermunchies said:
The way I view ADD is that it's the place I go when I have a question that has no chance in hell of being properly answered in BDD. Personally, I don't think threads should have to start out particularly scientific as long as they are asking for some sort of scientific or "advanced" answer.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think this is exactly what ADD shouldn't be - the first place people turn with a question that doesn't go in BDD.

Surely the relevant focus forum, PD, OD etc is where you should be going for queries that are above the level of BDD.
 
Inedible said:
[*]On the topic of focusing on harm reduction, ADD is mostly a "hobby" forum really; harm reduction is basically handled by the rest of the website in the focus forums.
Click to expand...

concur about the hobby part. I come here to seek verifiable knowledge about experiences not easily explained.
 
Hmm.. Although I dont post here much in the past, I visit here even lesser now so...
Dunno, but the topics are quite "downgraded" and looks uninteresting to me.
 
nuke said:
As mentioned in this thread,
One big problem we're having is that a lot of the smarter members here have been apparently providing free consulting work to marginally (or completely) illegal companies who would like to make lots of research chemicals to sell to people to get high on. And, basically, if a pharmaceutical company were to ask the same things of us, they would also give us thousands or tens of thousands of dollars while introducing new drugs to the public (with probably horrible side effects). This is multiplied by the fact that these drugs tend to create more health problems than the solve, compared to real pharmaceuticals.

I don't know if there's an easy answer to this aside from sticking to low abuse drug class discussions like psychedelics and... er, psychedelics, and otherwise harm reduction. Meanwhile, less well informed people have been flooding the forum with generally terrible ideas of new drugs to make, which is also a bad thing if companies start to pick up on those.

Not sure there's an easy answer to fixing this!
Click to expand...

What do you consider "a lot"?

I was really sad when I read that interview. It's bad enough that he did that, but it's worse knowing that one of the more "respected" members wrote it, obviously with no concern about the effect it's going to have.
 
Hammilton said:
What do you consider "a lot"?

I was really sad when I read that interview. It's bad enough that he did that, but it's worse knowing that one of the more "respected" members wrote it, obviously with no concern about the effect it's going to have.
Click to expand...

What effect is that? Its been an open secret for some time, and I don't see how the article will change things. No names are mentioned, the site isn't mentioned, and these kind of things have been going on for some time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top