- Joined
- Mar 12, 2002
- Messages
- 4,414
While there is much to respond to, unfortunately I don't have the hours needed at this moment.
@chugs, from what you have said, I would be part of the problem you talk about? As I'm a researcher, from a university, funded by the government, and I conduct research that includes ways of utilising Bluelight discussions as tools to understand new trends, as well as utilising Bluelight as a way of engaging with people who use drugs, who can otherwise be hard to access (for good reason given the illegality and potential harms if they came out in public).
Although I'm not a lurker... but I can tell you that there are many other researchers and others in the field that use Bluelight in what I would say is a positive way. e.g. drug worker has a client who mentions a new drug name they have used so drug worker lurks on Bluelight to understand a little more about that substance so they can be more useful to their clients.
The problem with your analysis is that it assumes that the lurkers will only use Bluelight to boost prohibition. But I can tell you (and can email you examples of mine and other people's publications) that Bluelight's appearance in research also helps to fight prohibition.
It is not as a simple as us and them. Some of the people you think are 'them' are actually 'us'.
Other random responses:
My PhD research with bluelighters and other forum users from 5 years ago found most people agreed that LE were reading their posts. Almost all people had rules about what they posted to reduce/eliminate any personal risks from posting about drugs in public online forums. --- perhaps these rules need to be more regularly discussed here to ensure people look after themselves in this space?
Also, it's technically not possible to block IP addresses correctly. The people in LE or govt that monitor BL will be able to access it regardless (they will make their own accounts or use anonymising software to access if IP is blocked). I think all such a thing will do is reduce unplanned access to BL from officials, and again I would not assume that these accesses are always going to be negative - people in government may be trying to understanding something from a health perspective, and accessing this information may help rather than hinder.
@chugs, from what you have said, I would be part of the problem you talk about? As I'm a researcher, from a university, funded by the government, and I conduct research that includes ways of utilising Bluelight discussions as tools to understand new trends, as well as utilising Bluelight as a way of engaging with people who use drugs, who can otherwise be hard to access (for good reason given the illegality and potential harms if they came out in public).
Although I'm not a lurker... but I can tell you that there are many other researchers and others in the field that use Bluelight in what I would say is a positive way. e.g. drug worker has a client who mentions a new drug name they have used so drug worker lurks on Bluelight to understand a little more about that substance so they can be more useful to their clients.
The problem with your analysis is that it assumes that the lurkers will only use Bluelight to boost prohibition. But I can tell you (and can email you examples of mine and other people's publications) that Bluelight's appearance in research also helps to fight prohibition.
It is not as a simple as us and them. Some of the people you think are 'them' are actually 'us'.
Other random responses:
My PhD research with bluelighters and other forum users from 5 years ago found most people agreed that LE were reading their posts. Almost all people had rules about what they posted to reduce/eliminate any personal risks from posting about drugs in public online forums. --- perhaps these rules need to be more regularly discussed here to ensure people look after themselves in this space?
Also, it's technically not possible to block IP addresses correctly. The people in LE or govt that monitor BL will be able to access it regardless (they will make their own accounts or use anonymising software to access if IP is blocked). I think all such a thing will do is reduce unplanned access to BL from officials, and again I would not assume that these accesses are always going to be negative - people in government may be trying to understanding something from a health perspective, and accessing this information may help rather than hinder.
