• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

The Drug's in the Mail - The Silk Road and our very own Tronica!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am saying that conversations stating the names of new market places are not permitted.
Click to expand...

If that is the case I suggest you have a trawl through this thread and moderate the entire thing as there are numerous mentions of other similiar sites on here.

If there is a media article of interest to this forum, as was the case with Silk Road, then it is acceptable to discuss the site as it relates to that article. I know this seems a little strange, but we cannot just have a free for all on this.
Click to expand...

This is quite hard to understand. Are you saying if there is a link to a media source stating ie: there is an alternative site similiar to silk road called blah... then that is okay to discuss?

if that is what you mean then I would say a little strange is an understatement. There is seriousley no logic at all in this ruling.

To be perfectly honest I don't see the HR in much of the discussion surrounding these sites, to my mind the only reason that any discussion on them is being allowed at all is purely out of interest and the fact that so many people want to. I am sure there are many web sites that people can talk about these sites and I don't really understand why some people are so desperate to talk about it on here.
Click to expand...

This thread has been active for a while. Its past the BL admin approval so on that basis the title speaks for itself.

i think the reason people want to talk about this site is because this topic right now is very hot, current and for some very interesting. By reading the Silk Road News update it would seem very likely a lot of the active sellers who were on Silk Road were also avid readers and users of Bluelight so whilst there are other sites that talk about drugs this is definitely a good one and full of very intelligent people to share opinions and debate with. It would also seem a few that clearly know a LOT about this topic.

It is a little bit strange to me that the whole time SR was at its peak there was an onslaught of people bitching about it being spoke about like we were giving out some secret, now it has gone down and people want to sit and rattle off the entire list of new websites? I gotta say it does not make much sense to me...
Click to expand...

Well I think this thread certainly hammered the secret to death. I would say the reason for the discussion about new websites is not so much to rattle of sources but more to discuss how the future is going to map out.

Will there be a new DPR?
Which site is going to take No1 position?
Is a new site gonna be the feds in discuise?
How safe and secure is a new site?

I think this is the type of relevance to these sites. Not hey kids this is where to buy your drugs..

On the basis the new sites are currently unestablished, embedded within tor so a search on google will not find them then I think the ruling to try and stop people from mentioning names seems a little paranoid.

Clearly we will do what you ask us to do as a mod but just my thoughts..
 
^ The logic is that we are not trying to restrict news articles or media sources but we are trying to restrict discussion of sources for drugs, I am not saying it is perfect but there has to be a balance somehow. We are trying to cut you guys a little slack and allow a bit of discussion on a topic that is of interest to users of this forum but does not generally meet its discussion criteria of relating to harm reduction, and arguably goes against one of the main guidelines which is no sources. We could probably sit around and devise a more convoluted system that wasn't based on any more logic and that nobody would pay attention to any way, but what would be the point. This is the same loophole that allowed Silk Road to be discussed and I didn't see anybody complaining about it then, if it weren't for this same "illogical" loophole then this kind of discussion never would of been allowed to take place period, I am generally curious if that is a situation you would prefer.

I would suggest if you think I am going to reread the better part of 1000 posts in case a single mention or two got dropped and accidentally left unedited I am sorry but you overestimate how much time I have to moderate this forum. I have edited out quite a number throughout the progression of this thread and just because you saw them a while ago does not mean they are still there, that said, I am by no means saying I (or my fellow mods) unapproved them all without any slipping under the radar. We as mods do our best but we are human and we do have lives and work outside of this website.

"I would say the reason for the discussion about new websites is not so much to rattle of sources but more to discuss how the future is going to map out." this line doesn't make much sense to me really, what you are talking about here doesn't relate to HR and is not of great relevance to this forum. I am sure there are a great number of forums on the web that allow you to ponder such things, I don't see why Bluelight absolutely must be one of them? The fact that discussing these sites is current, hot or interesting is not a very compelling argument for a discussion to take place on a harm reduction board.

Also, discussing which of the new sites would be the number one site and which is the most secure etc. IS essentially saying "hey kids this is where to buy your drugs" isn't it? I mean lets not be naive, if you are naming a source of drugs and say it is the best of its competitors and is relatively secure, you think that doesn't amount to an advertisement to go and purchase from that site? If not then we certainly don't see eye to eye on this issue.

The one point you do make about google is interesting, I don't use Tor or these sort of websites and I was not really aware of that. Is there some kind of browser on Tor that would allow one to search the same names and find them? If there is then I don't see it as particularly relevant whether a google search will yield results, however, if one does actually require a specific URL to access these sites then I am willing to reconsider my position on casual naming of these market places, and take it to my fellow moderators for a discussion. However, if it is how I expect it would be, and anyone who knew the name and had Tor could instantly get onto it then my position remains the same.

To your point about the admins, all sorts of things are allowed on different forums of this website, you can take all the social discussion that is allowed in EADD but is not allowed in AusDD as an example, I am not criticizing any other forum, their rules are not my business and may well work great for them, before I was ever a moderator there has been stricter focus on discussion relating to harm reduction in Australian Drug Discussion than a number of other forums on Bluelight and personally I think that is a positive thing for this forum.
 
Last edited:
drug_mentor said:
The one point you do make about google is interesting, I don't use Tor or these sort of websites and I was not really aware of that. Is there some kind of browser on Tor that would allow one to search the same names and find them? If there is then I don't see it as particularly relevant whether a google search will yield results, however, if one does actually require a specific URL to access these sites then I am willing to reconsider my position on casual naming of these market places, and take it to my fellow moderators for a discussion. However, if it is how I expect it would be, and anyone who knew the name and had Tor could instantly get onto it then my position remains the same.
Click to expand...

A specific URL is required to access these sites and even when known, wont work when used outside a Tor enabled browser. That said it doesnt take a rocket scientist to find these URL's with a search engine, but still puts it another step away from sourcing. They are no different to the silk road in that respect, and if we are allowing discussion to continue regarding SR without any new media (closed ~2 months) then why not the new websites which like SR was - should be named.

The Silk road is long gone, its replacements established and taking over the traffic. If we should be discussing anything relevant in the land of the dark web, its these sites. I think this thread should be closed or allowed to continue but permitting discussion of replacement sites mentioned by name.
 
There isn't a time limit on how long you can discuss a news article or the topics within it after it was written that I am aware of, so the fact that there hasn't been a particularly recent article isn't really justification for closure of this thread, and there has been numerous articles posted on it since SR even closed. There are current media articles reporting on the reopening of SR it just so happens that nobody has posted them in this thread, not yet any way.

This thread is less than 20 posts from being closed and I don't see much sense in closing it early at this stage. I do think that myself and the other mods probably do need to re examine if this type of discussion has a future in this forum after the closure of this thread, and if it does what form it will be allowed to continue in.

I can certainly see where some people see the current situation as a failure in logic on the part of those making the rules, but the issue for me is I don't want to go restricting or censoring media articles because they mention web sites and so it is hard to find a balance.
 
Any articles discussing the other sites can be submitted and commented on in DiTM, so I dont see whats the big deal about having them here.
 
New SR has to be the pigs, I would advise anyone whos wondering to steer clear until you hear more about it
 
L3inad said:
A specific URL is required to access these sites and even when known, wont work when used outside a Tor enabled browser. That said it doesnt take a rocket scientist to find these URL's with a search engine, but still puts it another step away from sourcing. They are no different to the silk road in that respect, and if we are allowing discussion to continue regarding SR without any new media (closed ~2 months) then why not the new websites which like SR was - should be named.
Click to expand...
It's worth reminding people that the real purpose of this thread was originally to highlight the fine work done by Tronica in researching and explaining the Silk Road (and related phenomena) via her articles, interviews and press appearances.
The press element - and the AusDD pride in knowing this "expert commentator" is a longtime bluelighter and "one of our own" made it worthy of discussion here. That's it.
To demand that all new discussion of all new black market drug websites be able to be speculated about on bluelight misses the original point of this thread surviving in the first place (it was never "silk road discussion thread") and was permitted, for a long time, to continue because it relates to more than simply a discussion about Silk Road.
There was a lot of discussion about this in my time as a mod; it's not some arbitrary rule that mods pick and choose whether or not to follow. I can confirm that for a long time, we were fortunate to even be able to have this discussion under the parameters set out; I don't think anywhere else on BL allowed mention of the 'Silk Road' name prior to the bust (though I could be mistaken)



As for logic, I would point you to some of the links posted, especially by futura2012, in regard to the LE scrutiny that is shown to exist of forums like this one (most likely including this one) in the wake (and undoubtedly long before) the bust of SR/DPR.
Do we want that sort of heat on the forum?
Is that what we're about?
Personally, I don't think opening ourselves up as a place filled with outlaws to be targeted by undercover d's and high tech LE is a good move. Open discussions of illicit marketplaces - essentially discussions of organised crime activities, as The Man sees it - brings this kind of heat.
That's not what bluelight is about. Our goal is harm reduction; not showing people how to get high or where to get drugs from.
There are plenty of other forums out there for that. Yes there are some pretty clever people here...I think there is good reason for that ;)
 
Last edited:
is it possible the new SR is run by the Feds trawling for addresses?
 
Yes. It's also possible that it's controlled by Kang and Kodos.
 
poledriver said:
Any articles discussing the other sites can be submitted and commented on in DiTM, so I don't see whats the big deal about having them here.
Click to expand...

If you recall a year or two ago I tried to get all news articles moved to DitM, something that proved difficult for a number of reasons and was ultimately unsuccessful. To my mind we either allow articles of interest to be posted in this forum or we don't, although I will concede that a good number of the articles posted in relation to this issue were not Australian specific, disallowing that does not entirely remove the problem of what to do with Australian specific articles relating to this topic, unless we were to make a special rule just for these articles, which seems as illogical as the ruling that people are criticising to me and clearly more restrictive.

Spacejunk also makes a good point that I failed to mention about Tronica's work on this subject, which is mentioned in the title of this thread, also being a factor in why this thread came to exist in the first place.

I have brought the issue up with Captain Brewster and Footscrazy any way so one of us will be back with a verdict when it has been reached. For the time being I would ask people to stick to the rules as they have been, which includes not mentioning any other market places on Tor. :)

DigitalLove, I tend to agree with you, I have not followed the whole SR thing nearly as closely as many on this forum and elsewhere, although I have certainly followed it. I am not one of those in the camp who thinks that Ullbricht is not the real DPR, for this reason (among others) I think that the Feds would likely have control over the server. It is also worth remembering they flipped some high level vendors, plenty of which likely did not make it to the press. I believe anyone who orders off the new site is fucking crazy, but then I always believed that those using this kind of service were taking a risk that was not worth it.
 
opi8 said:
Yes. It's also possible that it's controlled by Kang and Kodos.
Click to expand...

i may not be tech/law savvy, so maybe that is a dumb question. i just hope you dont make fun of people looking for HR advice.
 
I wasn't trying to make fun of anyone, I was stating a fact. Maybe attempting a joke at the same time.
 
If you recall a year or two ago I tried to get all news articles moved to DitM, something that proved difficult for a number of reasons and was ultimately unsuccessful. To my mind we either allow articles of interest to be posted in this forum or we don't, although I will concede that a good number of the articles posted in relation to this issue were not Australian specific, disallowing that does not entirely remove the problem of what to do with Australian specific articles relating to this topic, unless we were to make a special rule just for these articles, which seems as illogical as the ruling that people are criticising to me and clearly more restrictive.
Click to expand...

Yeah I recall, and have actively posted alot more news items over there than here since, sometimes I will pop some in the relevant threads here, but I try not to make a new thread unless I think it's pretty important news and or I think it's important info/news to get out there and have it's own thread for HR sake, which I dont think is very common.

Up to you guys what you decide to do regarding this thread after it hits 1000, which it seems is very soon.
 
mooms said:
is it possible the new SR is run by the Feds trawling for addresses?
Click to expand...

It's be a massive waste of money and time to bust a whole stack of people buying small amounts of product for personal use, I strongly doubt that is the case. Whoever is running it is a lot smarter than all of us put together.
 
mooms, I'd personally say no, I'd doubt that very much. But ya never know I guess.
 
AyahuascaSeeker13 said:
It's be a massive waste of money and time to bust a whole stack of people buying small amounts of product for personal use, I strongly doubt that is the case. Whoever is running it is a lot smarter than all of us put together.
Click to expand...
yeah maybe for larger vendors it might be worth it, but since they are all over the world it just seems really unlikely, and using that new login page (on SR 2) with the old SR take down notice just doesnt seem like something that would happen.
 
Anyway all I care about is if there is any local vendors on there selling A grade beef jerky. No sourcing or prices tho. But mmmmmm. Jerky.
 
1000



Beef%20jerky.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top