• CD Moderators: someguyontheinternet
  • Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

How do we want to handle the Synthetic Discussion in CD?

V

Verybuffed

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Messages
2,750
Location
2615
Hey guys.

Due to all the debate regarding whether Synthetic Cannabinoid discussion should be allowed in CD I have started this thread to get the ball rolling to discuss some of the issues we have been experiencing for a while here now.

It goes with out saying that this thread isn't the place for abusive posts rather that this thread be used to solve the problem.

What are some constructive ideas you guys have? Do we need a sub forum for synthetic discussion? How can we all improve our CD experience?

Play nice now :)
 
I think that people will always have very strong minded opinions on this matter, and people will always argue over which one is better for whatever reason. This is never going to change.

We could make a sub forum, but I don't think it would survive very long TBH, it's just not that popular. I think the Mega thread with the odd ball question warranting it's own thread is more than a sufficient supply for the demand JWH brings. There isn't much evidence here supporting otherwise.




"If it's not broke, don't fix it"
 
Thanks for the input wolfy.

I think as these substances become more readily available our issues here will increase. I have seen a recent surge in supply of these substances here in Australia but I am far way away from most of you guys so don't know what your situation is.

Maybe we could tweak the mega thread somehow to incorporate all the different synthetics? Would this even work? Again I am not very experienced with all the different synthetics so don't know all the little differences between them.

*waits for someone to fix w01fg4ng's quote*
 
A cannabinoid is an individual constituent of cannabis. A synthetic cannabinoid is just that- synthetic. But it's still a CANNABINOID, so the argument is moot because the answer is already apparent.


People who dislike synths (including myself) would be a bit presumptuous to exclude it from CD . . .almost like someone banning discussion of kush strains in a Strain disc. thread because that person didn't like kush. It makes no sense.


Furthermore, if we're to ban discussion of synth cannabinoids in CD, pipes and all other things NOT ecstasy should be banned from the Ecstasy forum . . .because they're not specifically MDMA.



As an entertaining side note: it is very comical indeed to see the marijuana community treating synths just like the non-smoking world (read: people who only drink alcohol) treats mj users. Oh, how the tables do turn.
 
Taryth said:
A cannabinoid is an individual constituent of cannabis. A synthetic cannabinoid is just that- synthetic. But it's still a CANNABINOID, so the argument is moot because the answer is already apparent.


People who dislike synths (including myself) would be a bit presumptuous to exclude it from CD . . .almost like someone banning discussion of kush strains in a Strain disc. thread because that person didn't like kush. It makes no sense.


Furthermore, if we're to ban discussion of synth cannabinoids in CD, pipes and all other things NOT ecstasy should be banned from the Ecstasy forum . . .because they're not specifically MDMA.



As an entertaining side note: it is very comical indeed to see the marijuana community treating synths just like the non-smoking world (read: people who only drink alcohol) treats mj users. Oh, how the tables do turn.
Click to expand...

I think it is the large quantity of threads constantly being created that is causing us grievances. There is a mega thread for this and people just need to learn to post in there. Perhaps the JWH mega thread needs to be stickied so everyone can see it and rather than start "JWH 250 Appreciation thread" they can just go in there and talk to the people that care about this. Because the fact of the matter is that most of these threads just cause abuse hurled from the cannabis lovers and the synthetic cannabinoid lovers.
 
i have nothing to add of value to this debate whatsoever in my current state, just droppin in to say...........................


















































HIGH
 
Taryth said:
A cannabinoid is an individual constituent of cannabis. A synthetic cannabinoid is just that- synthetic. But it's still a CANNABINOID, so the argument is moot because the answer is already apparent.

People who dislike synths (including myself) would be a bit presumptuous to exclude it from CD . . .almost like someone banning discussion of kush strains in a Strain disc. thread because that person didn't like kush. It makes no sense.

Furthermore, if we're to ban discussion of synth cannabinoids in CD, pipes and all other things NOT ecstasy should be banned from the Ecstasy forum . . .because they're not specifically MDMA.

As an entertaining side note: it is very comical indeed to see the marijuana community treating synths just like the non-smoking world (read: people who only drink alcohol) treats mj users. Oh, how the tables do turn.
Click to expand...

I think taryth hit the nail on the head. I am personally turned off by long, multiple page threads. It is hard to find the information you want by searching through the thread. Indeed, any search requires one to have specific topic to be searching on. A multipage thread, to me, makes it harder to simply browse for information. It would seem to work much better to have separate threads for separate topics to enable causal browsing. This allows readers to stumble upon information they otherwise wouldn't even begin to have thought of in a search by browsing prominently displayed thread topics.

Another thought, the synthetics provide effects similar to the real thing, so this is naturally the logical place for the discussion of its properties, amongst people who are somewhat familiar with it already. Additionally, this is a focus forum that I assume with the purpose of building knowledge of cannabis. These synthetic substances offer insight in to effects of non-synthetics. I think this is a more important point than whatever kind each person personally perfers or thinks. The potential for learning ought not to be squandered.
 
Good thread verybuffed, I'm interested to see what people think.

A sub forum for synthetic cannabinoids is out of the question. As far as I see it we can either have one centralized forum for all synthetics, or divide it between the different chemicals (CP, JWH, and AM? I think those are the most popular ones). I also don't see any problem with the discussion of the chemicals. This is the cannabis discussion forum and the synthetics are most closely related to Cannabis. So all you synthetic haters..cough cough sega :] ...can go suck it and just stay away from the threads.

What about the legal herb discussions? Most if not all of the legal herb blends you can buy contain these chemicals so should they be part of the synthetic discussion or stay in a separate thread?

Current Threads:
Legal Herb Discussion
JWH-018 Thread

Also PD has a thread that a lot of people don't know about...
The Big & Dandy Synthetic Cannabinoid Thread

Its a great thread but honestly the majority of discussion takes place in CD and if you read the first sentence in e1evene1even's thread he states "I think I should mention that I am talking about oral cannabis in a psychedelic context, rather than in the less intense smoked form."

More threads like this IMO. A publicly run forum > 3 mods doing it all.
 
^True. However this is "cannabis discussion", not "cannabinoid discussion".

Due to how these compounds are largely untested and some are probably quite toxic, I think discussion regarding them should be conducted in a forum where the majority of members are familiar with the use of unresearched compounds.

Additionally, grouping them together with cannabis might give some less-experienced users the impression that they are as safe as cannabis simply due to their categorization.

I'm sorry but I really don't trust CD to provide accurate harm-reduction information regarding synthetic cannabinoids; PD has already been entertaining discussion on these compounds for a long time, and the forum regulars know what they're talking about. Most CD regulars don't have experience bioassaying potentially dangerous, untested compounds and therefore should not be relied upon to provide accurate harm-reduction information regarding the consumption of aminoalkylindole cannabinoids.
 
im gonna go out on a limb and be brutally honest, personally i dont think it should be allowed in CD. its "CANNABIS - DISCUSSION"

not "fake manmade synthetics that could possibly cause harm with long term use discussion" (the long term health effects are simply not known)

so IMO, allowing discussion of synthetics in CD is just gonna keep dragging the board down to where we dont want it to go, like the lounge.
not only that but people (lurkers, or academics/scholars etc) who look on bluelight more than actual members do -
they go to CD looking for proper cannabis info, and "what is all this JW stuff man?"


I_m12YearsOld.jpg


to stop it, as i said -
no synthetics talk in CD, but a separate Forum/board for synthetic chems and analogues perhaps? (not just cannabis synths but all and all analogues?)


just my opinion, i leave it here, do what you wish with it.

peace





EDIT - i didnt even read any posts before posting this, but Roger -
hit the nail bang on the head as usual.


EDIT number 2 - its occured to me i posted some wierdness today. sorry about that, i was trippin
 
Roger&Me said:
^True. However this is "cannabis discussion", not "cannabinoid discussion".
Click to expand...
a semantic nuance?
Due to how these compounds are largely untested and some are probably quite toxic, I think discussion regarding them should be conducted in a forum where the majority of members are familiar with the use of unresearched compounds.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't want to censor discussion wherever it may seek to blossom. If people want to discuss and learn, why not? I think it is unwise to deny the validity of lay knowledge and experiences.
Additionally, grouping them together with cannabis might give some less-experienced users the impression that they are as safe as cannabis simply due to their categorization.

I'm sorry but I really don't trust CD to provide accurate harm-reduction information regarding synthetic cannabinoids; PD has already been entertaining discussion on these compounds for a long time, and the forum regulars know what they're talking about. Most CD regulars don't have experience bioassaying potentially dangerous, untested compounds and therefore should not be relied upon to provide accurate harm-reduction information regarding the consumption of aminoalkylindole cannabinoids.
Click to expand...

I believe it is best to not hide information and discussion. I believe in letting people learn and make the best judgement for themselves.

It seems the most logical to look for information regarding synthetic cannabinoids in the cannabis forum. I for one, if I was looking for information on the subject, would not have thought of looking in PD. Psychedelic is hardly how I would describe cannabis-like effects. I think this is something Roose is aware of seeing how the link to the PD synth thread was posted.

I really didn't think BL was the place where there is a presupposition of protecting people from themselves through the denial of information. I understand there are rules such as no sources or synthesis discussion but these are in place I think for much better reasons than protecting the ignorant masses.
 
orangescrewpen said:
a semantic nuance?
Click to expand...

Certainly not. Its neither semantic nor a nuance. Its a conceptual and fundamental difference.

Cannabis is an angiosperm that produces a wide array of psychoactive terpenes.

The synthetic cannabinoids we're discussing may interact with the human endocannabinoid system, but aside from that they bear no similarity to cannabis in any way. The majority of synthetic cannabinoids are not terpenes but indoles and some may be dangerous. They have a very short history of use in humans, unlike cannabis which has been used for millenia.

This isn't an issue of denying information, but rather of how to categorize information.
 
^Well actually cannabis as we know it would not exist without millenia of selective breeding and cultivation by humans. Likewise, you could argue that god did indeed create cocaine as the alkaloid is naturally present in the coca plant. I don't really care though, because I don't consider this an issue like that at all. Rather, I'm just pointing out the fact that synthetic cannabinoids and cannabis are conceptually unrelated phenomena despite how they both interact with the human endocannabinoid system and thus should be categorized separately here on BL.
 
Sega420 said:
exactly.

it is simply just NOT CANNABIS. at all.

it is a MAN. MADE. CHEMICAL.





god made weed, man made cocaine -
who do you trust?
Click to expand...

My my, Sega, aren't we just full of false analogies and straw-men today?

"God" also made arsenic, humans invented modern medicine-
Who do you trust?
See, I can do it, too! So please stop and lets leave the childish comments at the door.



If this is an HR site, then why WOULDN'T we allow the discussion, and, one would assume, dissemination of information regarding these potentially dangerous substances? Is that not the entire point of BL, or have you forgotten that? It's the same reason piperazines and other compounds RELATED to ecstasy [use] are allowed to be discussed in the E forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top