Lurkers in Aus:Drugs - and the individuals in Aus for the drug war

[chugs]

It just struck me that we seem to have far too many lurkers in this forum - for example as of 4:05pm EST, there are 1 members & 78 guests (guess who the member is). I understand that we share these pages in a bid to help ordinary people find help on how to use drugs safely however we know forces that opposed to legalisation (what should be the real aim of our community) regularly browse our threads seeking to rape these forums for information to create intelligence, research, policies and operations that further their own selfish careers and the overral War on Drugs.

Law Enforcement are inherently selfish and evil when it comes to the drug war. They know they cannot win this war. That drugs on the table of the media room after a bust aren't there to do anything but improving the odds that the office in charge makes the next round of promotions. Oh look at Detective Sergeant he busted that evil Lebanese crime syndicate. With that sort of performance he'll make Inspector. Lets pay for lavish travel to conference to hob-nob with others about their pointless achievements.

This isn't just about the cops. The employees, bureaucrat, researchers and members of the National Drug Strategy, National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund, National Advisory Committee on School Drug Education and dozens of other state and federal departments, agencies and such are basically funded by the Australian people to find ways to fuck us up. These groups research various places like BlueLight to identify trends, opinions and effectiveness of their strategies and operations.

Yet they are responsible for the biggest failure, and prison population that western society has ever seen. Has anyone from LE, or those aforementioned groups ever been punished for the fact that drugs are so easily available. For fucks sake I used to know one gang that would have an employee outside of the NSW parliament house dealing! Yet just this year was a conference at Luna Park where hundreds of people involved in this community, some of the very lurkers on these forums, sat around, drinking the finest Australian wines (oh the irony) and had fancy pointless speeches on ways to stop, proscute, attack and "cure" us poor ole addicts of our diseases.

Even the pro harm miminisation crowd are either cowards or for the most part against legalisation. Maybe decriminalisation but always from a context of reducing harm and never from the point of view that drug use should be a intrinsic freedom and that freely available, cleanly produced and affordable narcotics and psychedelics would reduce the vast majority of problems associated with drug use. With a properly funded health and education system supporting this system there would be massive improvements in our lives.

Many people on Bluelight discuss consistently and constantly the inability to find accessible Medically Assisted Treatment for Opioid Dependence (MOTAD - bupe and metahdone) and other programs for other forms of addiction.

These fucking lurkers ignore these stories and instead look for intelligence to further their own careers.

So Bluelight why haven't you take steps to stop these lurkers, these groups from raping our forums of our lives, our stories? A few things off the bat you could do

- assert copyright on all material published by users on bluelight. In turn any agency that uses this information in publications, policy and other areas could be sued for breaching copyright (without permission).
- blocking the IP addresses of every single Law Enforcement and government department in the country. For that matter this should apply for other forums in BL for the countries involved. sure they can use a non-blocked service but surely you can make it harder for them.
- require people to sign up to access the forums. Require people to sign a policy undertaking that they are not law enforcement or an agency or research group that seeking BL information to further the war on drugs. At least when it comes to researchers ethics committees can stop post grads from using our information to create propaganda research.

Many things could be done to stop these fuckers and yet nothing has happened. Lately I feel like BL has gotten closer with the enemy then the community they're meant to be supporting. So many new rules and strict enforcement of polices that limit users and nothing whatsoever to stop Law Enforcement.


Hell I'll put my money where my mouth is and personally find the IP addresses.

 

[Black Rabbit of Inle]

So Bluelight why haven't you take steps to stop these lurkers, these groups from raping our forums of our lives, our stories? A few things off the bat you could do

- assert copyright on all material published by users on bluelight. In turn any agency that uses this information in publications, policy and other areas could be sued for breaching copyright (without permission).
- blocking the IP addresses of every single Law Enforcement and government department in the country. For that matter this should apply for other forums in BL for the countries involved. sure they can use a non-blocked service but surely you can make it harder for them.
- require people to sign up to access the forums. Require people to sign a policy undertaking that they are not law enforcement or an agency or research group that seeking BL information to further the war on drugs. At least when it comes to researchers ethics committees can stop post grads from using our information to create propaganda research.

Many things could be done to stop these fuckers and yet nothing has happened. Lately I feel like BL has gotten closer with the enemy then the community they're meant to be supporting. So many new rules and strict enforcement of polices that limit users and nothing whatsoever to stop Law Enforcement.

This is something that you'd have to bring up with the Admin/owners, not publicly.

My opinion on the matter though:

It's a fine line to tread. Do we restrict access to the forums, making it look like we're elitists or that we have something to hide? Or do we remain completely open (except for staff forums) with any post available for LE and politicians to use, in any context, for their own advantages?

AFAIK it's not possible to copyright posts on a public forum. There are multiple issues with multi-country copyright laws and really, who gets the rights? Bluelight as a website, the individual posting or anyone who signs up?

Blocking IP addresses may seem straightforward, but LE does have access to proxies and IP scrambling software. It would be impossible to stay on top of every IP used by LE agencies.

Require people to sign a policy undertaking that they are not law enforcement or an agency or research group that seeking BL information to further the war on drugs.

How effective do you think T&C's really are? How many times have you lied, possibly clicking the 'I'm over 18' button when you were younger? How would this be enforced if instated?

These are all things you have to address.

IMO it's detrimental to BL's HR stance to create an 'Us vs Them' scenario. We're here to educate, not agitate.

This, however is all my opinion and not that of anyone else.

 

[Stevenski]

I would wager 99% of lurkers are curious people seeking genuine harm minimisation/information. I lurked for 4 months before joining here & in those 4 months I would have done permanent damage to my body had it not been for bluelight & the ability to read the forums without registering.

 

[opi8]

chugs:
Copyright is already asserted whenever you post something original anywhere - nothing else needs to be done. There are laws that allow using parts of a forum post, for example, as a fair use clause. If another site was simply copying all of your posts completely and putting them up on a website to profit from, then you would be (probably) within your legal rights to sue them for copyright infringement. I think it would be a civil case, unless it was an organisation like Woolworths doing it - but yeah, I'm no lawyer so I probably don't know much.

It took me a long time of lurking before I was comfortable enough to post. Also, this is common sense and even encouraged most places. Lurk mo4r (or something like that) is usually advised so you can get a feel for the community and understand the vibe, learn the trolls and basically know where you are and who you're talking with before you jump in and make a fool of yourself.

 

[One Thousand Words]

I like to think that I am not significant for others to care about and not interesting enough for my ramblings here to be taken seriously.




PS Cops are tops and I have never exhaled.

 

[Juvenile]

Even if you made people sign up to read the forums, there wouldn't really be any effective way of stopping media, L.E. or any other group from signing up an account. Unless you completely closed off all new memberships and only communicated with those you trusted? (even then, how would you ever know if someone is who they say they are online?) But then what would be the point of having a forum at all?
You want private conversations? then encrypt your email.

The primary purpose of this forum is harm reduction, it's best that it stay open and accessible. Particularly as for a lot of young people, this forum might be the only factual information they get regarding drugs. I know when I went through school I was taught complete bullshit about drugs. Pills are heroin and rat poison etc.

Also some of the lurkers might be members, who are on another device that they have not signed in on. I know I often browse BL from my mobile, which has a habit of signing me out every so often.

 

[footscrazy]

I don't have time to write a proper reply at the moment, but singling out 'lurkers' as the main problem here doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can't see the connection you seem to infer between people choosing not to browse under a username and the problems you have brought up.

It seems contradictory to me to bemoan the lack of sensible drug policy whilst at the same time, advocating restricting who can access information about drugs. I believe that it'll be through information and education that the common perceptions of drugs and their role in society will begin to change, not by prohibiting those in the best positions to make real changes access to real, evidence based information that may allow them to reconsider their opinions.

IMO, one of BL's greatest assets is the accessibility of information found here. I think any move to restrict this would be a massive backwards step, and in direct opposition to the promotion of more realistic and practical drug laws.

 

[thestudent14]

I would wager 99% of lurkers are curious people seeking genuine harm minimisation/information. I lurked for 4 months before joining here & in those 4 months I would have done permanent damage to my body had it not been for bluelight & the ability to read the forums without registering.

Same as myself.
Also have a few mates friends who check bluelight periodically who do not have accounts.

@chugs
I don't think your proposal carries much merit to be honest, cops using Aus DD to try to follow current trends has never directly affected me or friends of mine. In the last few years a hand full of RC's LE have come to see doing the rounds due to bluelight, 4-mar, 4-MMC, 25i-nbome come to mind, but I'm sure that's still a relatively small and minor issue compared to their war on drugs which will always have a primary focus towards the most scheduled or traditional drugs; heroin, meth, Ecstasy, Cannabis and LSD. Every thing else seems to be flavour of the year. Someone OD's on an RC, and the police have to look like they're doing something about it. They come down hard and do a few busts of the RC and then everything goes back to normal and I'm sure people import less because they now have their eye out for them. I haven't heard about a 4-MMC bust in ages, but I still wouldn't import it from overseas. Give it another couple years and I'd consider it (obviously only in small amounts).

These groups research various places like BlueLight to identify trends, opinions and effectiveness of their strategies and operations.

This shows that bluelight is just one of multiple resources to find this stuff out, if bluelight was more secure from LE it would kind of go against bluelights primary goal of HR.
I love the openess of bluelight, year in year out it shows how safe drug use can be, true we suffer tragedy's of bluelighters that end up in the shrine, but I would suspect that LE would also note that bluelighters are generally higher users than most as we tend to have an affinity towards drugs that standard drug users don't. But we respect drugs for their benefits and also their risks.

Making this site less available to me, makes it sound like we're trying to hide something. As far as I can tell, bluelight has never tried to hide anything and I encourage that. Open book policy, no sourcing. I don't see why we would want to keep this info from them, hell... I want LE to read my posts, maybe I'll change some of their views and if I can convince enough people that the drug war is a failure and to do something about it then I'm doing my roll in this countries progression. Furthermore, this site has always been about Harm Reduction, if I had to log in to this site to read it, I would've never joined, and I'd still be taking pills from strangers in clubs confused from adverse reactions, still think that amphetamine is speed and methamphetamine is ice, think crack is meth.

The only bad thing I think bluelight is responsible for is the restrictions on codeine. I could be wrong about this, but outside of bluelighters I don't know any codeine users, I think the love of codeine by some Bluelighters and the codeine megathread made it appear that it was common practice for people to use codeine for it's recreational value, but I still believe that codeine users were a tiny percentage of drug users and it's sad that when it really is the best thing to cure my headaches and is more difficult to purchase now even though I've never once used codeine recreationally.

 

[opi8]

The only bad thing I think bluelight is responsible for is the restrictions on codeine. I could be wrong about this, but outside of bluelighters I don't know any codeine users, I think the love of codeine by some Bluelighters and the codeine megathread made it appear that it was common practice for people to use codeine for it's recreational value, but I still believe that codeine users were a tiny percentage of drug users and it's sad that when it really is the best thing to cure my headaches and is more difficult to purchase now even though I've never once used codeine recreationally.

I liked the rest of your post, and I kind of agree with this part - but, and it's a big but, you're kind of like the people who want the threads which mention silk road shut down completely. I'm sorry but - the cat's out of the bag, this forum is not the reason it's hard for randoms to get good MDMA imported straight from countries that are watched, it's not the reason you're finding it harder to get codeine.

Bluelight isn't the only place that has talked about codeine OR, no ESPECIALLY silk road, main stream gets the nod for that. I agree it was glamorized for a while, the mods tightened down on that and unfortunately, we still get people coming on here saying they want to take methadone or bupe for a fucking codeine addiction. That's not harm reduction, that's getting people who could easily walk the other way and get over a small habit onto a life-long, deep opiod addiction with tentacles throwing themselves all over the persons mind, body and soul.

You can go to some forums related to similar topics as Bluelight and learn how to make krokodil if you want to lose your limbs and die in a year or so. You can, and many do.

This is not the only site on the internet that people read, primarily people come here for harm reduction and I think it's one of the best forums for drug information there is, primarily because of the harm reduction focus and the moderators know what they're talking about.

 

[chugs]

ok a lot of comments, lot of misunderstanding

I'm not advocating banning lurkers/restricting access. however a registration wall ain't going to stop someone trying to find out information. Maybe some things can be public so the google search will still guide them in.

Same as myself. also have a few mates friends who check bluelight periodically who do not have accounts. @chugs I don't think your proposal carries much merit to be honest, cops using Aus DD to try to follow current trends has never directly affected me or friends of mine.

Perhaps you haven't been affected but there have been several notable stories of people posting their stories/pictures and LE taking a strong interest, resulting in arrests. LE don't just use Bluelight for the flavour of the month drug research. Though considering its our information they should be forced to ask us for it rather then stealing it.

Awhile ago i made a thread about undercover LE. There had been a rash of people solicited by strangers (myself included). The thread I posted had some comments which indirectly validated the assertion I had made and basically confirmed LE were running operations in BL. I was asked privately not post such things so as to not disturb peace.

This shows that bluelight is just one of multiple resources to find this stuff out, if bluelight was more secure from LE it would kind of go against bluelights primary goal of HR.

To register an account and provide details isn't restricting access. BL administrators could use the information. Cross reference access. Poster claims they're in the US but IP and other data indicates they're in Sydney. That sort of validation. Generally LE efforts share the one IP address. Multiplier users logging in from one IP address that's registered to the NSW government would indicate something, especially if contradicted the information obtained at sign up.

I doubt people access BL for personal reasons from a government department considering the proxies, and filters they run.

[/QUOTE] only bad thing I think bluelight is responsible for is the restrictions on codeine. I could be wrong about this, but outside of bluelighters I don't know any codeine users, I think the love of codeine by some Bluelighters and the codeine megathread made it appear that it was common practice for people to use codeine for it's recreational value, but I still believe that codeine users were a tiny percentage of drug users and it's sad that when it really is the best thing to cure my headaches and is more difficult to purchase now even though I've never once used codeine recreationally.[/QUOTE]

and that is one bad thing on top of who knows how many. Restricting Codeine, the redesign of the Nurofen plus tablets, forcing opiate users to buying unsafe drugs from the blackmarket. Seriously people we suffer these indignities like we're naughty children and the adults are taking our toys away.

These are our goddamn fucking rights and they're using our words, our experiences, our lives to restrict our access to these drugs. They're hurting huge quantities of people in the belief that they are saving us from ourselves. They are wrong and it is criminal. If I was to single handily damage the lives of tens of thousands of people I'd be thrown into prison with the key tossed away. These people in the TGA, LE, National Council on Drugs and so on. These are bad people.

Drugs will be legal one day and these policy makers, police officers and ministers who maintained prohibition (for own enrichment) will be seen in the same light as the Spanish Inquisition.

I don't have time to write a proper reply at the moment, but singling out 'lurkers' as the main problem here doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can't see the connection you seem to infer between people choosing not to browse under a username and the problems you have brought up.

I never said that 100% of the lurkers were LE/bad. I would hazard that some are.

It seems contradictory to me to bemoan the lack of sensible drug policy whilst at the same time, advocating restricting who can access information about drugs.

They are ignoring the information on this site as it as we have zero sensible drug policy as it stands. And no I'm not advocating the restriction of access to normal people. I've advocating the restriction of access by any government IP range.

Even if you made people sign up to read the forums, there wouldn't really be any effective way of stopping media, L.E. or any other group from signing up an account. Unless you completely closed off all new memberships and only communicated with those you trusted? (even then, how would you ever know if someone is who they say they are online?) But then what would be the point of having a forum at all?
You want private conversations? then encrypt your email.

I'm guess you have no experience on contract law. Yes these things that mean that you have obligations and rights, with consequences should the other party wish to enforce the agreement.

The primary purpose of this forum is harm reduction, it's best that it stay open and accessible. Particularly as for a lot of young people, this forum might be the only factual information they get regarding drugs. I know when I went through school I was taught complete bullshit about drugs. Pills are heroin and rat poison etc.

People please this is third post. I'm not advocating for BL to be inaccessible. I'm saying that government departments have no business on this forum.

Also some of the lurkers might be members, who are on another device that they have not signed in on. I know I often browse BL from my mobile, which has a habit of signing me out every so often.

Yes that could be the case but again these would be from shared services. Cost wise the government wouldn't have several lurkers logging in from several different IPs. they'd come in from the same IP, using the same equipment etc.

This information can be captured and could be analysed by BL admins and such to cross reference access.

This is how they discovered and located the hackers that were employed by the Chinese government to hack western companies and such.

chugs:
Copyright is already asserted whenever you post something original anywhere - nothing else needs to be done. There are laws that allow using parts of a forum post, for example, as a fair use clause. If another site was simply copying all of your posts completely and putting them up on a website to profit from, then you would be (probably) within your legal rights to sue them for copyright infringement. I think it would be a civil case, unless it was an organisation like Woolworths doing it - but yeah, I'm no lawyer so I probably don't know much.

You can transfer your copyright to others, or even licence it to BL. This can be done at the sign up process. It can be explained to users that this is being done to protect them as BL, as an organisation can assert ownership of the copyright and ensure that your words aren't used for any purpose that you don't allow.

Many people have been sued for ripping off the articles and texts of newspapers and other places. Your text on BL is no different. BL should not be allowing others to use our stories for any purpose other then the education of users and lurkers who come in good faith to learn how to use drugs. Again in response to your other points I am not advocating the blocking of IP addresses that are non-government. Yes we could restrict to registered users but registering account is no barrier. Shit I register for forums several times a week. its annoying but it takes ten seconds. If i was seeking information on say rat poison in my acid then surely a site registration wouldn't stop me from using BL?

I would gladly fund BL additional monies if they used them to attack those who misuse our information i.e. the media, law enforcement, the government.

I would wager 99% of lurkers are curious people seeking genuine harm minimisation/information. I lurked for 4 months before joining here & in those 4 months I would have done permanent damage to my body had it not been for bluelight & the ability to read the forums without registering.

Yep i agree. but there are still lurkers who use our information against us and we do nothing to stop them.

This is something that you'd have to bring up with the Admin/owners, not publicly.

The opinion I've heard over the years is they don't want to piss LE or give them any reason to come after BL.

So great. Let LE and the government use our stories to strengthen their prohibition polices and strategies. Allow them to ban the next great drug out there because a user asks about it on BL. It actually causes more harm allowing to see this information.

AFAIK it's not possible to copyright posts on a public forum. There are multiple issues with multi-country copyright laws and really, who gets the rights? Bluelight as a website, the individual posting or anyone who signs up?

Yes you can copyright just like you copyright an article. A blog, a post is no different. Who abuses that copyright, and whether the jurisdiction has the same laws is an issue but we're not talking about Chinese pirates here. We're talking about our own government, LE, researchers, policy makers, committee members and others in the prohibition community who use our words in their reports and other material, some that is published, that they're using without our permission.

Australia law says they must gain our permission.

Blocking IP addresses may seem straightforward, but LE does have access to proxies and IP scrambling software. It would be impossible to stay on top of every IP used by LE agencies.

I too have said something like that. But only a minority have access to that sort of equipment and knowledge in the government, and LE. For the most part they'd be cock blocked, especially the researchers and policy makers.

How effective do you think T&C's really are? How many times have you lied, possibly clicking the 'I'm over 18' button when you were younger? How would this be enforced if instated?

Effective, especially on how well they're written.

About a decade ago I worked for a company that, due to a particular mistake that was occurring was refunding $50,000 a month to customers.

I rewrote the terms and conditions, created a new policy and system framework and we went from $50k to $0 a month in refunds, and this all based on that little "I accept button" that we all mindlessly push.

It purely depends on who your target is and how you use these terms and conditions, jurisdiction and more importantly whether you have the balls to enforce your rights, and their obligation.

Again I don't care about Chinese pirates. However the government does have to play by the law. Same with LE.

IMO it's detrimental to BL's HR stance to create an 'Us vs Them' scenario. We're here to educate, not agitate.

Right this second someone died of drugs that were made illegal by "them". My friends have died, and suffered great harms from drugs, where the greatest harm was of a direct result of the laws that were created and enforce. They have blood on their hands and yet they have the gall to act like the adults here and make us the criminal, dirty junkies?

Right now thousands are suffering significant health and financial consequences. Some as a direct result of polices that were made from ripping information from BL (see the codiene point above).

I work in the corporate world. I deal with government departments. I've been on committees that create polices, regulations and recommendation for laws, and have worked directly with NSW police.

They honestly don't give a fuck about you dirty junkies. The senior command down the to grunts on the street. They just care about locking up the bad guys (you), getting promoted and believing that they've somehow saved society because they've locked those dirty lebs traffickers in jail.Shit they don't give a fuck about the public. I remember the greatest they were concerned about was the amount of paper work they had to do.

For the most part our biggest trouble was that our customers were being robbed, thousands and thousands of dollars and they didn't give a fuck whatsoever. They don't care. If anything they care more for the professional criminal then they do for the average punter.

Drugs on the table, photo ops and promotions is all they care about. Read their BIOs of the commissioners. Read the material written by the deputies. They all crow about their dedication to drug prohibition and saving Australians from the scourge of drugs. No they've imprisoned people, destroyed families knowing full well they can never win this war. How immoral to destroy someones life over a herb, or a powder. They keep fucking people over and over.

and BL is doing anything from using our information. Feeding it on a platter to them.

They could so very simple changes that would just make it a little challenging. Hell don't worry about the registration point. Just ban the government IP ranges.

I've been part of this community for the last decade, and was a lurker for years before that. It used to be far more radical, strident in their desire to change this world. Far better at working with its members and users. These days though I feel like its attempting to become respectable. And for what? Has it changed Australia's drug laws. Has decriminalisation happened? BL has a huge membership and yet they don't marshall it.

----

Anyway please don't take my tone as that of attacking you lot. I'm just upset. and my post was more a statement to the LE lurkers to go fuck themselves.

 

[opi8]

I see what you're saying - and I feel your emotion in your writing.

But changes happen gradually. No matter how keen WE are for changes to happen, in a democratic world, which is a lie, but it is what we live in, the majority needs to be pursuaded to join the bandwagon and I think Bluelight does a good job of presenting the facts and letting people decide what they want based on facts.

I do appreciate what you are trying to do.

 

[thestudent14]

I liked the rest of your post, and I kind of agree with this part - but, and it's a big but, you're kind of like the people who want the threads which mention silk road shut down completely. I'm sorry but - the cat's out of the bag, this forum is not the reason it's hard for randoms to get good MDMA imported straight from countries that are watched, it's not the reason you're finding it harder to get codeine.

Bluelight isn't the only place that has talked about codeine OR, no ESPECIALLY silk road, main stream gets the nod for that. I agree it was glamorized for a while, the mods tightened down on that and unfortunately, we still get people coming on here saying they want to take methadone or bupe for a fucking codeine addiction. That's not harm reduction, that's getting people who could easily walk the other way and get over a small habit onto a life-long, deep opiod addiction with tentacles throwing themselves all over the persons mind, body and soul.

You can go to some forums related to similar topics as Bluelight and learn how to make krokodil if you want to lose your limbs and die in a year or so. You can, and many do.

This is not the only site on the internet that people read, primarily people come here for harm reduction and I think it's one of the best forums for drug information there is, primarily because of the harm reduction focus and the moderators know what they're talking about.

I remember when the silk road thread started how people were firing up about us 'revealing' it to the public. But the truth is LE were probably already onto it long before it hit the mainstream media, and the media would've heard about it sooner or later anyway. I doubt bluelight accelerated the process of LE trying to do something about silk road at all.

The only reason I mentioned Codeine was because to me it's a very niche' market of drug users who get into codeine use recreationally. I've known lots of drug user, true I know less opiate and benzo users then stims and psychadelics but I didn't even know codeine had a recreational value until I was on bluelight. That doesn't meant the LE wouldn't have known anyway, but I would think that bluelight made it's recreational use more aware amongst the public and LE could feel the need to get something done about it. This is all speculation of course, but codeine has been around since the 1800's, so I would suspect it's not entirely new for people to know that it has recreational value. But only a few years of it being in the headlines of bluelight on the front page of AusDD and it now is more difficult (still relatively easy though, but difficult to get large amounts) to get and you can be denied it. Believe what you want, but based on the evidence in front of me I can see how bluelight played it's roll in making codeine less available. I in no way 'blame' bluelight for this because I believe in complete disclosure of information and peoples rights to know what can and can't be used recreationally and the safest way to do so. It's my understanding that codeine was far worse for you unless you did some form of wash from it first to seperate the paracetamol (if my memory serves me correctly, I rarely read stuff to do with codeine/opiates/benzo's).

@chugs
I can see your frustrations, and I understand where you're coming from but I respectfully disagree.
Also as far as LE running operations, it has been said on multiple times, by multiple regulars/mods/admins, that we expect LE read some of our posts, and we've definitey had rats in our posters throughout the past.
I think there is another important point you're missing chugs is that if we put additional security measures up to say keep IP adress's from the government out is a flawed idea. Not in the sense it's not possible, but it's flawed because it may give posters a false sense of security. Isn't it easy to set up routers to avoid this problem whenever they wanted to check bluelight? If not, what would stop them making a fake account and then checking the website on a daily basis from there phones?

I just don't see the benefits of trying such a thing. As far as copywriting is concerned, I don't know it is or isn't possible. If it is, I have no real problem with it, the rare time I have seen bluelight mentioned in media articles it tends to give the most reasonable information in the article, far more reliable then what comes from word of mouth and government facts on drugs. So I think this wouldn't achieve anything, what I post I want to be read so if a media article decides I or someone else has made a point worth posting, most of the time they're right and making them request to use copywrited text seems like it won't really achieve anything except occasionaly silencing ourself.

I've been part of this community for the last decade, and was a lurker for years before that. It used to be far more radical, strident in their desire to change this world. Far better at working with its members and users. These days though I feel like its attempting to become respectable. And for what? Has it changed Australia's drug laws. Has decriminalisation happened? BL has a huge membership and yet they don't marshall it.
.

Perhaps we do waste time trying to become respectable, but perhaps that's the only way we will see change. Have Australian drug laws changed, no but currently there is a drug law reform party which hopefully recieved enough members (I suspect it did) to be an official party, last year the report done by Australia21 showed that more Australians are becoming open to changes in drug law reform. True it was shunned immediately by both the PM and the Opposition leader (hypocrisy at it's finest seeing they've both smoked cannabis) but there are still positives to be taken from this. All around the world we're seeing drug law reform discussion and action, you think Australia doesn't have a keen eye to see how the legalisation of cannabis in Colarado and Washington plays out over these first 12-24 months.

I think if I'd been on this site for the extra 6 years like yourself, I'd be run down by it and more frustrated with the lack of change on a political level and the seemingly less passionate people who post now. But most of us are on the same side and we have to continue to do what we as a whole believe is in the best interests of HR. That's what we agreed to when we joined bl.

Don't think I'm attacking back at you in anyway chugs, more often then not I agree with your posts, this is just how I feel on this topic.
Respect %)

 

[poledriver]

I dont care about 'lurkers' personally, I see them as people just like you and I, and they are browsing threads and finding out about certain drugs etc. Nothing bad, they just haven't signed up is all. That's the way I like to imagine it anyway.

One advantage to restricting access to guests maybe more people would possibly sign up for an account to be able to browse further, and the site could boast having however many 'members', by restricting access I mean something like guests could only browse the forums threads titles and not go inside the actual thread, but this would probably be counter productive as some people would still not sign up and might miss out on certain information that may benefit them or their friends or family, and possibly google bots and the like might not be able to catalog all the information so things wouldn't come up in peoples web searches.

 

[artline]

I have been a member on here for a number of years but rarely do I post, if at all. That said I lurk on here all the time and would visit the site at minimum 2-3 times a week, BL is a fantastic resource and a great way of keeping informed about what is happening in the world of drugs.
I understand that "lurking" is not constructive nor am I an active participant in the BL community but rarely do I have anything constructive to add to threads and I often find them cluttered with unnecessary or uninformed opinions, so why would I add my own unnecessary, uninformed opinion into the mix?
I wonder how many lurkers use less than in their past or are no longer active in the drug community and visit to keep in the loop, stay informed or relive past life experiences?

Just my 2 cents.
Yours sincerely, long time lurker.

 

[poledriver]

I wonder how many lurkers use less than in their past or are no longer active in the drug community and visit to keep in the loop, stay informed or relive past life experiences?

Yeah, that's probably pretty common.

 

[needmore]

I lurk cause I am too lazy or fucked up to sign in I don't think that will ever change

 

[thestudent14]

I have been a member on here for a number of years but rarely do I post, if at all. That said I lurk on here all the time and would visit the site at minimum 2-3 times a week, BL is a fantastic resource and a great way of keeping informed about what is happening in the world of drugs.
I understand that "lurking" is not constructive nor am I an active participant in the BL community but rarely do I have anything constructive to add to threads and I often find them cluttered with unnecessary or uninformed opinions, so why would I add my own unnecessary, uninformed opinion into the mix?
I wonder how many lurkers use less than in their past or are no longer active in the drug community and visit to keep in the loop, stay informed or relive past life experiences?

Just my 2 cents.
Yours sincerely, long time lurker.

Nothing wrong with not posting, it's still constructive as our goal is Harm minimsation, and if you practice this based on bluelight and preach good techniques/ideas/issues to friends then you are still being constructing and I have no problem with you not posting if you feel you have nothing to add.

 

[TangerinO]

Nah bro they all ran off to r/drugs

 

[One Thousand Words]

Perhaps you haven't been affected but there have been several notable stories of people posting their stories/pictures and LE taking a strong interest, resulting in arrests. LE don't just use Bluelight for the flavour of the month drug research. Though considering its our information they should be forced to ask us for it rather then stealing it.

Awhile ago i made a thread about undercover LE. There had been a rash of people solicited by strangers (myself included). The thread I posted had some comments which indirectly validated the assertion I had made and basically confirmed LE were running operations in BL. I was asked privately not post such things so as to not disturb peace.

If you don't want others to read and use your opinions, views or experiences you could always lurk and not post

 

[artline]

Nothing wrong with not posting, it's still constructive as our goal is Harm minimsation, and if you practice this based on bluelight and preach good techniques/ideas/issues to friends then you are still being constructing and I have no problem with you not posting if you feel you have nothing to add.

And that is what I do. Im always recommending to friends to research and gain knowledge from Bluelight about the drugs they are consuming, dosing etc. My younger sister is amongst the generation of people that take drugs without ever knowing anything about the substance they're taking. Closing the forums off to non members is not, in my opinion, the right path to go down. In many cases if people have to sign up in order to find out information, they wont, and the whole harm minimisation goal of BL will only reach its members rather than a greater audience.