Speak Your Mind on the OD Rules

[sixpartseven]

Blindedbythelight, I made a huge boo boo and fucked up your post. It was not intentional, and I know this is a huge thing to ask, but since its unrecoverable, can you repost it? I was trying to copy and past from the original text, and I accidentally deleted instead of copying.

Im really sorry.

EDIT: No, you didnt do anything wrong. Im an idiot and sometimes click the wrong buttons.

EDIT EDIT: If you do rewrite it, you can PM it to me and I will place it back in its original place, two posts above this one, that way it will still be in context.

 

[ayjay]

Im not upset. You just keep spouting off the exact same thing that has already been addressed by 3 different mods.

We hear you. We disagree with you. Thats the end of it. Move on.

It's hard to drop this one - I think BL is a great site and I've got a lot of value from participating in forums here over the last 5 years. I'm also very committed to harm reduction - it is my profession and I take great care in considering my professional practice in light of harm reduction theory and research.

To single out pharmacotherapy as the one kind of prescription medication that you can't discuss on ODD, outside of using it in the intended manner, is illogical and counter to harm reduction principles. It has no place in the ODD guidelines.

No-one, moderators included, has satisfactorily addressed this issue on this thread.

Thanks Flex for chiming in on my side - we might just have to give this one up as a lost cause for now

 

[sixpartseven]

I guess Im just confused. You keep saying we havent satisfactorily addressed the issue?

What exactly is the issue?

Dumb it down for me. Explain it to me like youre explaining it to a 5 year old.

 

[ayjay]

We already discussed this. UTFSE

 

[rolls]

I guess Im just confused. You keep saying we havent satisfactorily addressed the issue?

What exactly is the issue?

Dumb it down for me. Explain it to me like youre explaining it to a 5 year old.

I also don't really understand what hes referring to.

 

[sixpartseven]

We already discussed this. UTFSE

If youre not going to take it seriously, why should I?

I know it has to do with shooting suboxone, but I dont see what your argument is. In fact, I dont even think you have a reasonable argument. I think youre just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[GenericMind]

To single out pharmacotherapy as the one kind of prescription medication that you can't discuss on ODD, outside of using it in the intended manner, is illogical and counter to harm reduction principles.

No, it's not. A line has to be drawn somewhere. We're saying it's going to be drawn at abusing treatment programs meant to help addicts. They're the best thing going as far as addiction treatment goes right now and I'm sick of seeing people abuse the hell out them. People that want to inject Suboxone they get from clinics are the reasons friends of mine, people that really need it and who want to use it as it's intended, have to wait four months just to get in to see a Suboxone Doctor. If someone wants information on abusing one of these medications there are other places to find information, and there's even plenty that can be found here in OD using the Search Engine. There is no satisfactory advice to give these people other than to use these treatment programs as they're intended or quit using up valuable resources that other people need in my opinion. You're entitled to disagree, but this particular topic was one of the main focuses that brought about these policy changes so it's not going to be changing anytime soon.

 

[sixpartseven]

^ I couldnt have said it better.

Thats the point I was trying to get across, ayjay. If you are in the Harm Reduction field, which I think is what you said, correct me if Im wrong, then I dont see how you dont agree with that.

 

[ayjay]

I"ve read back through my posts on this thread (beginning page 3!). I can't restate my case any more clearly - hence the UTFSE joke. Every argument raised against my posts has been answered in my subsequent posts.

And no I don't agree with GM's post - as explained in some of my earlier posts. I can't usefully add to this matter, so I'm bowing out

 

[Naptown Wicked]

hey guys I just wanted to chime in about the post from the guy who though he was gonna be high forever.

I too thought that it was kinda rediculous for that to be locked. I also had no problem whatsoever understanding what the guy was trying to say and was absolutely shocked when I saw that a mod had closed it.

It just worries me that someone in his state of mind would have to feel that they need to have their post proofread by their english professer before it will be accepted by the mods! The guy was obviously tweaked and freaked, and having been in those shoes totally understand that.

All he needed was a little reassurance and was denied because he MAY have been somewhat illiterate (at least by the mods standards)

 

[Flexistentialist]

^ I couldnt have said it better.

Thats the point I was trying to get across, ayjay. If you are in the Harm Reduction field, which I think is what you said, correct me if Im wrong, then I dont see how you dont agree with that.

Restricting access to information that could reduce harm because you are morally opposed to the practice in question is contrary to harm reduction principles.

Like Ayjay, harm reduction is my profession and watching you guys perpetuate exactly the same myths as our opponents (eg: talking about it = condoning / promoting it), is extremely frustrating. But like you say Ajay, I do believe this one's become pointless.

Any of the mods have a professional background in alcohol and other drug / health or related fields per chance?

 

[delta_9]

All he needed was a little reassurance and was denied because he MAY have been somewhat illiterate (at least by the mods standards)

He's not "illiterate"(which btw means something completely different than what you're implying here) in the least. blindedbythelight posted in this thread expressing his concern in plain and coherent english, proving he has no trouble doing so with the rest of his posts.
IMO the mods are very lenient, and have been so in the past, which I believe is why they started this thread in the first place. As said before, the mods are human, they like to have fun, they like to get high, they like to make jokes just like the rest of us. BUT, they also have an important job to do, and that job needs to come first when they log on. If you(and I mean this rhetorically) feel you'd be a better mod, submit an application next time the admins need a new mod. The opportunity presents itself more often then you might think. I took a break from bl for like 3 months and there were new staff members in almost every forum.

As far as this whole suboxone thing, it seems a moot point by now. I keep reading the same things over and over, and it's clear neither side is going to yeild. Bottom line, the mods have the final say, and I posted the proper way to address an issue with a mod earlier in this forum.

 

[smp150]

This is a rare opportunity being given to you right now. Nowhere in my immediate memory do I remember seeing a forum on BL give the community a chance to openly discuss that forums policies/rules, and quite possibly affect how the forum is ran. Since this opportunity is being given to all of you, we expect a respectable atmosphere in this thread....We will be actively engaging in discussion in this thread, so anything you want to say or know, dont hold back.

What is with the pompous attitude with some of the moderators? "Rare opportunity being given to you?" You are aware that this is just a web forum about drugs right? Maybe we can discuss some of the mods holier than thou attitude towards their members?

Also, doesn't banning discussion of how to get high run counter to your goal of harm reduction, as someone who can't get an answer on how to get the best high might do something stupid that kills him/her and end up defeating the stated purpose of this website in the first place?

 

[delta_9]

Also, doesn't banning discussion of how to get high run counter to your goal of harm reduction, as someone who can't get an answer on how to get the best high might do something stupid that kills him/her and end up defeating the stated purpose of this website in the first place?

The mods are only saying they wont allow future topics on "____" to be created. Topics created in the past about "____" can still be easily found by using the search engine.

 

[smp150]

The mods are only saying they wont allow future topics on "____" to be created. Topics created in the past about "____" can still be easily found by using the search engine.

Fair enough, and actually a good point, but what if there is a new drug introduced?

 

[delta_9]

Fair enough, and actually a good point, but what if there is a new drug introduced?

While that's certainly possible, the mods cant see the future, and I'm sure they'll address that issue if and when they come to it.
This isn't an attack against you or anything, but a big part of this thread has been "what if" and thats not the way to run a site. There has to be rules and there has to be a line drawn somewhere. I'm sure if I looked at any rule here for any forum I could find something and say "what if", but the mods dont have the time to go thread by thread(especially OD, with 34,000+ individual threads) and say "what if".

 

[xxl]

The woes of the OD forum may have to do with the fact that contrary to other specialised forums which deal with only one drug, the OD forum is about any "other" drugs, so it has become a dump for all queries that can't be accommodated in the other forums.

One way out would be to split the OD forum into specialised forums : 1) Coke, speed and analogues 2) Opiates 3) Pharms and other legal highs. In this way serious queries regarding such potentially hazardous hard drugs as coke and heroin would not get diluted into dozens of repetitive, pointless questions about snorting xanax or extracting a valium prescription from a reluctant physician. Other benefits would be that questions like "what syringe to use" could be answered without posters having first to be questioned about which drug it is they're injecting. Of course, once the OD forum is split, out-of-place posts should be deleted, not transfered, so as to force people to post into the right niche. After all, there's no benefit in having a general OD forum if one third of its posts have to be redirected.

 

[GenericMind]

Restricting access to information that could reduce harm because you are morally opposed to the practice in question is contrary to harm reduction principles.

Should I start allowing threads in Drug Culture about the smartest way to rob someone at gunpoint? I'm sure there are certain ways of doing it that would minimize the chances of you getting shot or stabbed by the intended victim. What about huffing gasoline? Will I be working against Harm Reduction principles when I close that thread? After all, there may be someone out there that might actually try to drink it, or even worse, inject it.

I understand what you're saying, I just disagree. I may not have a professional background in a related field like you do, but I do know other people that do that I wouldn't trust to moderate this forum.

Also, doesn't banning discussion of how to get high run counter to your goal of harm reduction, as someone who can't get an answer on how to get the best high might do something stupid that kills him/her and end up defeating the stated purpose of this website in the first place?

We're not banning discussion on how to get high, we're banning discussion on how to maximize your high. There's plenty of information here on potentiation of virtually any drug you could ever want to take. If one can't be bothered to use the Search Engine to find it, well, that's on them. Getting the "Best High" from a drug usually means you're not getting the safest high, and that's what we're here to promote. We're not here to help anyone make the most out of their Saturday night.

 

[ccm]

The argument against the mods restricting FUTURE "shoot Sub" posts would go down smoother if there were no place else to find this info. Also, the info is on this site. This particular site has taken a stand on it, which is their perogative.

If I go to a restaurant and I don't like the food, I don't go back. I don't go into the kitchen and tell them what they did wrong. If they are using pigeon meat instead of beef, what am I to say?

Point is, we have a choice about where we spend our time, and if we vehemently disagree with how things are done at our spot, we can go hang somewhere else.

The arguments have been hashed/rehashed here. No new shoot Sub stuff. Correct me if I missunderstood, GM or Six. 'Cause oh Lord, please don't let me be missunderstood.:D

 

[ccm]

Should I start allowing threads in Drug Culture about the smartest way to rob someone at gunpoint? I'm sure there are certain ways of doing it that would minimize the chances of you getting shot or stabbed by the intended victim. What about huffing gasoline? Will I be working against Harm Reduction principles when I close that thread? After all, there may be someone out there that might actually try to drink it, or even worse, inject it.

Oh, snap! I was kinda hoping you could tell me how to jack a car without having to actually pull out a weapon to get the driver out of the vehicle.

lol