1) Read it however you want, but Team OD in no way maintains a defeatist attitude, and not to contradict the meaning for this thread's inception or anything but our crew here are the most qualified, experienced, knowledgeable, and overall know best how to run the most heavily trafficked drug forum on the internet.
2) When I went into great detail about why it is very unlikely that we would ever split up OD into sub-sub-forums, I made numerous points to explain / justify my reasoning, however you didn't respond to any of the logical/objective reasons I listed.
3) Personally, (and the consensus of team OD is as follows: this suggestion has been raised many times over the years, and we didn't decide to run OD the way it is ran today without serious consideration and weighing the pros and cons of segregating drugs by class), and we have repeatedly concluded that segregation would do just that; segregate the forum and in doing so, for the many reasons I described, can be adding yet another barrier and in no way improves easier access to harm reduction pertinent information.
-I assure you, these decisions are not made lightly, and to reinforce one of the main arguments for why segregation offers zero HR benefits and even could lower the accessibility and response time to threads that the poly drug abuse community alone, already one of the highest "at-risk" populations of members.
-Poly drug users far outnumber the opioid-only number of threads (Which of course, 95% of the time, are redundant/repetitious or flat out have been asked and answered thousands of times already) , and because of how serious combining the drugs covered in OD can be, it's vital that we value the easier access to life-saving information over the alleged convenience of splitting OD into OD & Opiates... drug interactions can be serious/fatal.
Having to explain to the benzodiazepine forum why mixing with opioids and also having to explain to the opioid forum why benzodiazepines/alcohol/CNS depressants are in general, very unsafe and notoriously lethal drug combinations, this information is critical, massively underestimated and having to explain the exact same response in a variety of forums is beyond reduntant, and definitely falls under the OD Guidelines prohibition of discussion of the same topics ad nauseum.
if you go to other forums, there are serious consequences for NOT using "swim" - so it's a hard habit to break when they come here. if it's considered troublesome, you could put a warning in red at the top of every page, "do not use swim or foaf or any other such terms" - and/or add those terms to a filter which would not allow them to post using those words, or would pop up the rule so they could revise the post first.
-In times past, we used filters like you described that allowed similar functions to perform, like typing a specific phrase would delete your account/autoban. If we decided to edit out SWIM (Which posters who are complying with the BLUA don't need to worry about), I don't see how it would help anything at all either.
-These 'macro' like functions may at first appear to be handy, but in practice, don't make anything any different and makes it impossible for those who are literally trying to describe the act of swimming, say on ____ drug, and if they shouldn't be swimming while intoxicated, we need to be able to not have the servers automatically edit our posts for us in the event that it completely renders all responses containing the characters "swim" possibly useless, confusing, or difficult to understand which is a much bigger problem again thinking Harm Reduction wise.
-The SWIM acronym is annoying and an eyesore, and it is a waste of staff volunteer time when we have to go through an entire thread and switch the terminology to the correct "I, me, myself" format, since SWIM offers zero protection from incriminating data one puts on the internet forever, it would be a whole lot of changes and extra work for staff (We could have banners and 100 pop ups on every page saying "READ THE RULES! READ THE RULES!", "ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO POST THIS?", and all for pretty much no effect on harm reduction if anything, just making the HR information more difficult to access and deter members who need access the most.
-It is made explicitly clear when registering an account here, that your account is created under the unwavering conditions that you agree to know in their entirety, cooperate/follow all the rules, use common sense, etc.... And there are links to the BLUA all over the place especially when members are at account creation stage, you'd have to be visually or cognitively impaired to not find the BLUA on the registration page (and on 99% of every page, forum, sub-forum, staff signatures, ALL with links to the BLUA)....
-Yet, STILL people indicate that they accept the terms and conditions despite choosing not to read what they probably think is a very very very long Terms of Service, checking the mandatory I understand / I agree / I accept option that in most users experiences, like for example, the iTunes Terms and Conditions of Service is like... what, hundreds? about 100 or so anyways, 100 pages of size 8-10 font size and because so many people don't ever bother to read the Terms and Conditions of an application, website, databank, or the dozens to hundreds of pages of literature that only a fraction of the more intelligent/careful users read in it's entirety.
-It's a shame that people sometimes don't bother to read the BLUA, but if they didn't read the BLUA, it is rarely a matter of the BLUA not being more accessible / "in their face" since there are links to the BLUA on every page on BL. People just probably assume it's a huge document and that they'd rather check the box saying they read & will comply with the rules than attempt to read our direct, concise, and extremely carefully written Bluelight User Agreement.
-I value your suggestions and have definitely considered this from many angles over the years, also curious as to whether splitting the forums, or making new users forced to read or be reminded of the rules, and over the years of observation, and as you said, looking at other forums that took different approaches to these issues, either being much more strict with the useless SWIM acronym, or making new users jump through dozens of hoops and hurdles before they can actually post their question and receive harm reduction advice in a timely manner.
-Honestly have not seen a single advantage these other forums benefited from by implementing the changes you've raised, and all feedback is welcome but as a general reminder to everyone, it's best to keep in mind that this is a strictly harm reduction based focus forum (as clearly outlined in bold letters under the forum description), and that while all feedback is welcomed, the suggestions that focus on increasing the availability and rapid access to harm reduction material are of much greater concern to us than new users thinking that saying SWIM is any less incriminating in court than saying "I, Me, Myself" etc.
I wish there was a better way of ensuring that posters have read and understood the rules prior to posting, but as explicitly stated upon creation of the account, all of this is covered, and while it is a waste of moderating resources to spend time editing a long post from SWIM --> I/me/myself/etc, I just think it's a rather low priority task in the greater scheme of things, especially since using SWIM is a mistake that users often make just once or twice before the community links them to the BLUA that we are ALL bound by, and this is not something that people tend to do after they've been told SWIM use is forbidden and offers no legal protection whatsoever.
-SWIM only makes the affected posts difficult or outright annoying to decipher/read, are overly vague, and limit our ability to provide HR to the people who actually say "Hey so I am this that and the other thing, and my question is, how many _____ should I combine with _____ I have a tolerance of _______ and use the following other medications as well _______________". As the BLUA says, you are responsible for what you post, if you violate the BLUA in any way, some things are not a big deal, some things can be met with an immediate and permanent ban from the community.
-It is not Bluelight's responsibility to ensure that posters know the rules they should know and it's a waste of time and resources in my opinion since minor issues like using SWIM upon joining the community, and how often these issues are and can be resolved without staff intervention because our community of members that remind the OP's that the BLUA is being violated and if people are serial offenders, then Staff can resolve the issue with the offender.
In conclusion, the vast majority of SWIM related usage resolves itself on it's own and devoting more staff time to regulating the (often self-correcting) accidental offenses often committed by new members who quickly leave or learn.
I just see time being spent more effectively, efficiently, and explicitly in the best interest of the community and the life-threatening behavior that regularly arises, taking priority over minor violations, and would not be the best use of the time dedicated by staff to Bluelight, as it distracts from reduction of harm and the necessity for users to research and actually know a thing or two about what they put in their bodies (in addition to merely knowing say, the name of the drug, and that it makes them feel "good".)
What a person chooses to post online, is, well, frankly, it is their own choice once they hit Submit Reply, and their actions will have consequences, so this is why the BLUA stresses not to incriminate where it can be avoided especially when it is not nearly as important nor as relevant as the HR issue they are presenting; It overall just seems like focusing too much on minor details that DO matter but DONT necessarily add to the discussion of Harm Reduction, (the focus of this forum).
I've often desired that all greenlighters be required to go through multiple verification forms, pop-ups/disclaimers that say "YES I HAVE USED THE SEARCH ENGINE AND KNOW THE STANCE THIS COMMUNITY TAKES ON POSTING STANDARDS", or something like that, but as mentioned in your post, you (and I) have both seen other forums and how they attempt to automate the enforcement of the rules, but I do not see how focusing on stuff like SWIM or creating sub-forums for Opiates and then somehow just keep the rest of the many substances OD covers daily. Also, if opioid users had their own forum, what makes them entitled to one over someone who uses methamphetamine, cocaine, and/or pharmaceuticals?
Hypothetically I think it would be very unfair, and it would be very irritating to give one class of drugs covered by OD their own sub-forum just because they are so commonly abused and preferred by most people (Speaking myself as an opiate addict & a legitimate chronic pain patient [worst dual diagnosis one can have IME], I understand the high demand for all opioid related discussion, I really do,) but segregating the forum has done nothing to better any of the other forums I've seen with segregated/drug-specific divided systems.
If anything, segregation makes HR less available and the Search Engine Function less effective and leads to more people posting stuff in incorrect forums, or dealing with poly drug abuse that can't be discussed in two forums simultaneously without severe impact on the ability of Staff to best serve the community in a timely fashion especially to those who need the most help and time is a factor.