Are some novel compounds too addictive, dangerous or exclusive to discuss?

[Snowy]

Bluelight is definitely the major source for inspiration it seems.

Libraries and universities are the major source of information. Still, nobody thinks about closing them down or restricting them, because of that.

 

[Hammilton]

The major source of information for who? Not the people commercializing these things.

Terrible argument.

 

[Snowy]

The major source of information for who? Not the people commercializing these things.

Terrible argument.

I'm sure you have some source to validate your claim? Or is this just a random allegation?

Funny argument 8)

 

[Hammilton]

Did you read this thread? Lots of sources and examples. dimethocaine, the JWH's, some of the other stimulants, are all confirmed to have come from here. The rest are just most likely to have come from here.

 

[Snowy]

Did you read this thread? Lots of sources and examples. dimethocaine, the JWH's, some of the other stimulants, are all confirmed to have come from here. The rest are just most likely to have come from here.

Yes.
Confirmed? Can you show how it has been confirmed, please? - Maybe i did miss something...
Why? Because people talked/talk about them?

 

[vecktor]

I really have no problem with people going out there and researching things for themselves, because in doing so they get a greater understanding for the subject. If they just harvest ideas and predigested targets from forums like this on there is no understanding and no general background knowledge of the subject. So as I have said I think people who have already digested the literature and have figured out the SAR and the interesting compounds should be wary of posting it on a public forum, because who knows who will read it or what they will do with the information.

If we want access to any novel substances in the not too distant future this has to be done. If people don't protect the compounds they will disappear in a cloud of overdoses deaths and general imbecility (check out some of the other forums on this site for Darwin Award contenders). I object to having a compound that has value, that has been used responsably for some time being destroyed in this head long greedy rush.

3-MeOPCP for example will appear in various RC lists, then perhaps in a legal high, then in a autopsy and then in the legislation.

Anyone with any appreciation would not have run with mephedrone for instance, having read pihkal and note the number of betahydroxy compounds with scary cardiovascular side effects, then check the literature for other similar compounds and stop and think then look somewhere else. There was plenty of examples of a scary lack of knowledge from the various vendors who posted on this forum. I did hear the same geniuses that brought meph to the market were looking at beta keto DOB, even the idea of that scares the fuck out of me.

Methylmethaqualone is another compound that anyone who had bothered to read the literature would not have even synthesized, let alone marketed.

we don't need any more sorgenkinder.

 

[nuke]

Does anyone know about the development of desoxypipradrol or MDPV? Besides o-DMeTramadol and mephedrone, these are the sorts of things that scare me being sold, especially in pseudo-herbal products. Products nearly as potent as meth, or even more so, that are longer lasting, are a recipe for disaster. Weird thing is that they're not even non-analogues.

As to MDPV, a certain banned someone (responsible for the initial 'lucigenol' schmooze too) who apparently has a long history with the law posted the patent here about it. Then a certain defunct dutch vendor began making it. I have no idea if there was any interaction going on there, since I never had any actual contact with either party.

Not sure where desoxypipradrol or mephedrone came from. I kind of wish whoever made mephedrone would have stopped here first so we could have told them they're a munch of morons.

 

[Hammilton]

Yeah, I remember that was between when I registered my first account and when I actually was able to post.

I don't know about mephedrone, but I do know the guy who started "methedrone" and was selling lots of mephedrone around the UK. You probably remember his insane telepathic ability to determine how various things bind, and frequent, incorrect use of the word "electronegative..."

I let him know every reason why methedrone was a terrible drug to sell, but reason had no impact.

When he was asking for designer barb analogue ideas I cut off contact. (like thio-analogues of glutethimide)

I remember the lucigenol thing really well. It got sold for a while but now it seems to be dead. Too expensive for crappy results?

 

[seep]

I wonder if one of the commercial ventures inspired by BL discussions was this recent 2-diphenylmethylpyrrolidine thing (not a novel compound). Not that it's all that important, but the major profiteer may have been a company that also owns a major league baseball team.

That particular nomenclature pops up once on the BL search engine prior to the 9/15/09 thread. Benzhydrylpyrrolidine pops up a few other times, as does diphenylprolinol. But look at the 2007 mention of 2-diphenylmethylpyrrolidine and see that poster's 11 other posts. Does he sound like someone who's just, you know, musing about stims just for the fuck of it?

This one isn't about people wanting to get high. A lot of otherwise drug-free people got it for weight loss and energy. How many boxes were sold between the February release and the raid on 9/25? How many other supplements disappeared overnight?

 

[Jamshyd]

Actually I'm pretty sure that snowy is a troll and even have a suspicion of who he may be an alt of.

Don't feed the trolls.

 

[Hammilton]

Yep.

 

[Snowy]

3-MeOPCP for example will appear in various RC lists, then perhaps in a legal high, then in a autopsy and then in the legislation.

That's true, but what is the point in taking personal freedom to prevent this?
If you take this further you'll need a license to buy kitchen knives.

we don't need any more sorgenkinder.

Is 'sorgenkinder' a loanword you used accidentally?
The inventor of LSD (Albert Hofmann) wrote a book called "LSD - Mein Sorgenking" (aka 'LSD - My problem child') about LSD - a very interesting RC at this time. He actually did much research on other indol alkaloids too. I see it as a worthy contribution. Other RCs might be as interesting.

Actually I'm pretty sure that snowy is a troll and even have a suspicion of who he may be an alt of.

Don't feed the trolls.

Who is my alter ego if i may ask? Am i trolling because i think your view is dull?

@Hammilton:
So you don't have any confirmation. It's - as i expected - just a theory of yours, which is not disproven yet.
PS:
Seeing discussions on RCs appearing on the market isn't a proof. No matter what timing...
Talking to 'vendors' who tell amazing things isn't a proof.
Thinking to be right is not a proof.

 

[8-12]

3-MeOPCP for example will appear in various RC lists, then perhaps in a legal high, then in a autopsy and then in the legislation.

This is the part that really worries me. It opens up unresearched compounds to the portion of the public that wants to get high but is put off by scary IUPAC names and ambiguous white powders. Why deal with a strange email source when one can just turn to these friendly legal highs which are marketed with pretty colors and have websites with "fun" designs? RC sourcing was never incredibly difficult, but it's somewhat prohibitive to some, and legal highs can be obtained by literally anyone. Most of these people don't know or care what they're taking.

Not to mention the fact that it takes forever for us to figure out what's actually in these things, the makers decide to leave out the exact active ingredient and thus we have no safety profile.

 

[vecktor]

sorgenkinder plural of the noun sorgenkind.

Thankyou for pointing out Albert Hofmann wrote a book and researched other indole alkaloids! well I never, I guess it would be in one of those illegal library things 8)

snowy you are entitled to bang the freedom of speech drum, I really don't care.

I have no need to debate with you, you have nothing to offer apart from some ill thought out examples of reductio ad absurdum.

 

[Snowy]

sorgenkinder plural of the noun sorgenkind.

Thankyou for pointing out Albert Hofmann wrote a book and researched other indole alkaloids! well I never, I guess it would be in one of those illegal library things 8)

snowy you are entitled to bang the freedom of speech drum, I really don't care.

I have no need to debate with you, you have nothing to offer apart from some ill thought out examples of reductio ad absurdum.

Thank you for the infromation about the numerus of 'sorgenkind'.
'Sorgenkind' being a noun is also very interesting here.

Thankyou for pointing out Albert Hofmann wrote a book and researched other indole alkaloids! well I never, I guess it would be in one of those illegal library things

Here is an example of an impressive rhetorical side blow.8)

I tried to give an example of a RC considered as 'sorgenkind' (thanks for pointing out this as a noun, which has a different sounding plural), which proved to be very interesting.
If people thought of it being too dangerous, it would have never become known.

Can you explain what is ill thought in my examples of reductio ad absurdum?
That might be more productive than just trying to bash a little.

 

[MurphyClox]

Bluelight is definitely the major source for inspiration it seems.

Libraries and universities are the major source of information. Still, nobody thinks about closing them down or restricting them, because of that.

1. Hammilton said "inspiration", you said "information". These are 2 totally different things and your statement is, therefore, pointless. Inspiration of any kind requires some kind of (as Vecktor expressed it nicely) predigested information.

2. Did you read my last posts in this thread? It is not information that we are seeking to be regulated (The information is out there. Go and READ!) but we demand some own studying. That's the point that people are constantly ignoring resp. misinterpreting. * Please read the 1st paragraph of post #66 by Vecktor, he said it all!

- Murphy

* Edit: I thought about it again. Why is it that hardly anyone from the fraction that is against the partial restriction of discussion is willing to comment on this argument? Obviously nobody is willing to take the laborious, long way of studying a topic on yourself. That is - to say the least - very sad.

 

[ebola?]

Err...there are multiple ways of interpreting that argument. How could it be that someone could put her own work into study of potential targets for new, intriguing recreational drugs and then launch a discussion based thereon without running the risk of someone 'eavesdropping', just compiling a list of things that could be sold as '4-6 hour party' (5 hour energy's seductive, dangerous counterpart )?

ebola

 

[ebola?]

That's true, but what is the point in taking personal freedom to prevent this?
If you take this further you'll need a license to buy kitchen knives.

This! This is an example of an ill thought argument via reductio.

ebola

 

[Hammilton]

@Hammilton:
So you don't have any confirmation. It's - as i expected - just a theory of yours, which is not disproven yet.
PS:
Seeing discussions on RCs appearing on the market isn't a proof. No matter what timing...
Talking to 'vendors' who tell amazing things isn't a proof.
Thinking to be right is not a proof.

If talking to a vendor who confirms that they obtained their ideas from these forums isn't proof for you, there's very little point in you discussing anything here, since you've set the bar beyond reason.

In the US the standard for proof in criminal trials is beyond a reasonable doubt. In civil action, it's the preponderance of the evidence, so basically >50% to express it mathematically.

To apply either standard to the discussion here, the claim that forums are being used for inspiration is satisfactorily proven.

If you want to believe that these people have independently researched these compounds in university libraries, you're welcome to, but that's not what the evidence indicates- especially when we have vendors who have confirmed in private.

As you ought to be aware, naming vendors here is strictly verboten, and I'm not going to break the rule to name those that I have direct experience with.

I know many of us (I can think of at least 4) here have direct experience with vendors, it kind of comes with the territory. Of the two vendors I actually know, both *were* members and derived ALL of their knowledge from here. They were both idiots whose only special ability was the ability to come up with a decent amount of money to have kilos of dimethocaine, 3-MeO-PCP, Mephedrone, and DXM made up at a time. With that list you can probably figure out who they were, because I don't think many still sell DXM and not many have added dimethocaine yet. One disapeared when he added "methedrone" to his catalogue, and I've not heard from him in almost a year. No one will miss his idiotic posts though.

I don't like saying this much, really, and I understand why the others aren't saying what they know, since I believe they're closer to the vendors they know than I ever was.

It's kind of a moot point though. I know that I'll never post an experience report for a novel substance in public again, though.

 

[MurphyClox]

I know that I'll never post an experience report for a novel substance in public again, though.

And that's one of the sad details of this whole story: I totally share Hammiltons point of view in this respect. Rather than sharing what one has experienced, trip reports will be held confidential now, in particular if the compound in question shows an unexpected good pharmacological profile. Why had it to come this far? It goes - I openly admit this - against some of the ideas behind forums like Bluelight, but the current development demands such discretion IMHO.

- Murphy