• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

Trying X for the first time

Status
Not open for further replies.
Most of the pills in the North and Southwest sections are from Cali, at least most of the MDxx containing ones.


And almost every other MDMA pill in the West comes from California.

All the Pokes are from Cali, those are pretty dank. OG ones too.
Then the Pumas, Guccis, Bottles, XXXs, Naked Ladies... all MDMA and meth. Also from Cali.





Oh wait you mean from ED? Almost all the MDMA samples are from Cali, outside of the US, were pressed in California, or are in crystal form.
 
The only thing you can ascertain is the percentage of bunk pills sent to those organisations. That doesn't map to the prevalence or distribution pattern of said pills in the area they were bought or submitted from. Then you have to take into account that maybe they were sent in precisely because there have been doubts about their quality. Which may not happen with presses or batches which have been in circulation for a while and are widely known for being decent. Differences in the likelihood of using such services and composition of the customer base might further skew the results. Using ecstasydata or pillreports are valuable tools to get an idea about a specific batch circulating in your area, but they are a poor source for gauging quality and availability. I wouldn't totally dismiss your observations, but they can't be used to prove anything really.

Police lab statistics about the average quality of pills and crystal confiscated at music venues or clubs or wherever punters congregate would offer much more insight but I feel the results could also veer drastically from the actual market situation, because the seized pills not necessarily mirror the distribution and volume of those trafficked.
Statistics are tricky, and most erroneous examinations go wrong at the selection and quality of the data used. Getting a grip on an illicit market is therefore exceedingly difficult.
 
There's really no reason to argue with folley because he's just trying to say that a majority of supposed ecstasy pills these days aren't composed of MDMA. And then trying to say that his guesstimated statistics are going against harm reduction is absurd. Bottom line- most pills that are said to be MDMA aren't actually that. Your bickering, IMO, is getting farther away from harm reduction than folley is.

And to the original poster, if you're getting pressed pills then look up the stamp and color on pill reports. If possible, buy a test kit to prove that your pills and/or Molly consist of primarily MDMA. If they show up as MDMA low on pill reports take 1 to 2 and you'll have a great and safe night while most likely avoiding a shitty comedown. Honestly, I would trust pills more than Molly these days unless you have a test kit.

Lastly, you're doing the right thing by researching drugs before you take them so don't feel awkward or a 'noob' just because you haven't tried it yet. Have a great time and find someone special to experience the love known as MDMA :D
 
Folley said:
http://www.ecstasydata.org/stats.php

22% of samples sent in 2012 had MDMA only.

67.8% had NO MDMA
Click to expand...

This is all i asked you about in the first place... i wasnt trying to prove you wrong... i wanted to know how you knew so i could know too... :)

But lets not forget the reason people send stuff to ecstasydata, because they are suspicious of the contents... pills that reagent test perfectly and have no "non-ecstasy effects" dont get sent in...

Im not running around trying to prove you wrong... i want you to prove yourself right... if youd have gone to ecstasydata first and said "edata says 68%, heres the link". Then there would have been no argument ;)

I used to be the same way, id read something somewhere and remember it later and quote it the way i remebered it as a fact... sure enough someone would ask me where i got the info and i couldnt remember or went to find it and realized id misquoted it or something then id look like an ass... i learned to always check myself before making claims in forums... been much happier and much more respected ever since ;)
 
Last edited:
yea folley is right

excluding certain parts of CA and Chicago i would estimate around 80% or more of US pills contain zero MDMA. Im not going to waste my time counting up every pill sent to PR and Edata to prove this, but those who live in the US and are actively seeking MD know this to be fact.
 
^ it's not a fact. it's your opinion based on extrapolation from a skewed sample.

given the illicit nature of the products in question, it's simply not possible to gather the quantity or quality of data required to present a truly factual analysis of the situation.

alasdair
 
i would say my sample is pretty large.... dozens of BLers, countless PR posts, Edata submissions and more then a handfull of personal tests. Like i said im not going to tally all of these up but an estimation would be in excess of 80%. Maybe i have some bias because i live on the east coast and am not as in touch with places like NV, or WA and OR which seem to have a somewhat better pill scene. Still there are places over here where good pills literally DO NOT exist.
 
^ this is all i'm saying. i'm asking you - and others - to say what you mean and not embellish figures, and dress up speculation as fact.

i was told 2 days ago, in an extremely vitriolic private message, that there are absolutely no pills containing mdma available in the town in which i live (by somebody who does not even live here). he is demonstrably wrong for reasons that i can't go into for risk of incriminating myself. i have no idea what drives somebody to doggedly cling to some idea they have about a certain scene or a certain geography but we have to insist of fact and corroboration over speculation and fabrication if bluelight is to be taken seriously as a harm reduction resource.

again, given the illicit nature of the market, the variables at play remain hard to define in useful ways. when i see statements which begin "all pills..." (even "almost all...") or "no pills..." (even "almost no..."), the author is basically implying they know the content of (almost) every single pill in the population. aside from the fact that this kind of thing fails the idiot test at the very first hurdle, how do you even begin to meaningfully measure something like that in a market like this? it's nonsense.

even if you did tally up the data you describe above and even if it did come close to your guess of 80%, you still have to take that number with a huge grain of salt for the reasons that agnetha enumerated elegantly - the self-selecting nature of the sample for one and the huge sample bias for another.

some think it's needless bickering. i think it goes to the very heart of what bluelight is about and, if we allow speculation and fabrication to take the place of factual analysis and evidence-supported claims, it represents a clear danger to bluelight's future.

thanks for your considered response. it's appreciated.

alasdair
 
Blanch said:
i would say my sample is pretty large.... dozens of BLers, countless PR posts, Edata submissions and more then a handfull of personal tests. Like i said im not going to tally all of these up but an estimation would be in excess of 80%. Maybe i have some bias because i live on the east coast and am not as in touch with places like NV, or WA and OR which seem to have a somewhat better pill scene. Still there are places over here where good pills literally DO NOT exist.
Click to expand...

I can get dank pills from nevada tonight... but thats really beside the point, the point is that making generalizations that arent based on solid fact is really counterproductive...

How often do you get pissed when you read about a police bust where they bust someone for 50 pounds of pot and then saying it had a "street value" of a half million dollars... yea sure if you divide it up entirely by grams and sell them all for 20 bucks... but thats not the value of 50 pounds of pot... they tweak the numbers and stats to male themselves look good... im not gonna allow that type of logic in this forum...
 
alasdairm said:
i was told 2 days ago, in an extremely vitriolic private message, that there are absolutely no pills containing mdma available in the town in which i live (by somebody who does not even live here). he is demonstrably wrong for reasons that i can't go into for risk of incriminating myself. i have no idea what drives somebody to doggedly cling to some idea they have about a certain scene or a certain geography but we have to insist of fact and corroboration over speculation and fabrication if bluelight is to be taken seriously as a harm reduction resource.
Click to expand...

Thanks for making that sound like that was from me.


There are some SMALL circles where good pills are very common, and MDMA is easy to find. The same can be said for LSD.

But if you go to a rave and buy a pill, the chances of it actually containing MDMA are slim to none. You cannot deny this, and to someone going to raves often but trying "X" for their first time, they NEED to know this fact.

And it is a fact. As much of a fact that can come about from the reports of thousands of people around the country at least.




If you try to debate that statement, then there is no way you know anything about the current "ecstasy" market in the US.
 
Yea it is kind of like, if it looks like a duck and it sound like a duck well then... of course im not going to run a dna test to see if it is a duck but deductive reasoning tells me it is.


Folley and I are starting a war against the moderators... some how i think they might win lol
 
Blanch said:
Folley and I are starting a war against the moderators... some how i think they might win lol
Click to expand...
blanch, you seem capable of carrying on a discussion with tact and civility - we are not at war :)
Folley said:
Thanks for making that sound like that was from me.
Click to expand...
that is an extraordinary statement. nowhere did i say, or even imply it was from you. did you send me such a pm? no. so it wasn't from you. :\

ridiculous.

alasdair
 
Last edited:
I am going to concede in the debate (mostly because I have to go to work :p)

I will admit that being presumptuous is indeed a slippery slope and the use of such logic needs to be monitored. However I also understand Folley's frustration and agree very strongly with this specific quote:

Folley said:
There are some SMALL circles where good pills are very common, and MDMA is easy to find. The same can be said for LSD.

But if you go to a rave and buy a pill, the chances of it actually containing MDMA are slim to none. You cannot deny this, and to someone going to raves often but trying "X" for their first time, they NEED to know this fact.
Click to expand...


GOOD DAY SIR!
 
Well when you go to a rave an buy a neon colored pill with the consistency of a crayola that makes you puke foam and hallucinate evil spirts all night, don't come crying to us.



Or you could just buy a test kit and avoid all that, like I said in my first post.
 
Blanch said:
Yea it is kind of like, if it looks like a duck and it sound like a duck well then... of course im not going to run a dna test to see if it is a duck but deductive reasoning tells me it is.


Folley and I are starting a war against the moderators... some how i think they might win lol
Click to expand...

Tell that to the game warden when you shoot the wrong kind of duck... or dont have a hunting license...

A broken clock is right twice a day... and you even know exactly when it will be correct... but unless you have another clock to check it against then its still useless and misleading information...

For this site to work everyone needs to be free to question others... either you can answer and prove your claim or you cant... ive guessed wrong lots of times, but i learn the right answer and am happy to learn :)
 
Folley said:
Well when you go to a rave an buy a neon colored pill with the consistency of a crayola that makes you puke foam and hallucinate evil spirts all night, don't come crying to us.
Click to expand...
folley, you must not be listening to a word myself, and others are saying. it's understandable as you're young and you think you know everything. one day, you'll be liberated when you find out what you really know :)

i absolutely agree with you when you say that people should test their pills. i believe that nobody should consume a pill unless it's been tested. ever.

at the risk of going around in a circle, the thing that is causing friction here is your habit of wrapping good advice in unconditional comments. you have a habit of presenting guesses and urban truths as facts and that's simply not acceptable. this is not acceptable on bluelight more generally and it's especially dangerous in a forum like ed which sees a lot of new posters and a large volume of unregistered guest traffic.

is it too much to ask that, if you mean "more than half" - and you can substantiate that - that you say "more than half" instead of just picking a number like 70% out of the air? 99% and 51% are both more than half but they're a world apart...

you can't say that you believe harm-reduction is important and, in the same breath, tell people that, no matter where you are in the US, at all times you should take two pills because one can never be enough.

we're both here for the same reason. you think i'm an old fart who knows nothing. i think you're a stupid young idiot who thinks he knows everything. do you think either of those are accurate characterisations? you care about bluelight? so do i - but it's my responsibility (in part, obviously) to make sure that bluelight is taken seriously and is around tomorrow to continue its harm reduction work. i see speculation and fabrication passed off as hr as a threat to that.

when somebody asks you to substantiate a claim, they're not attacking you. they're inviting to to show that what you're saying is true. if you care about bluelight and about harm-reduction in general, you should respect that and you should jump as the chance to prove that what you're saying is true, not get combative and argumentative and tell everybody they're wrong and you're right. think about that.

this can't go on. please digest and consider.

thanks and regards

alasdair
 
You can ask me to provide a source, but when I DO provide one you cant keep pretending that I'm simply talking out of my ass.


Anyone is free to call me out on my information, but if you're going to do it you better be damn ready to defend yourself. And if you're going to TRY and FIND information that you deem as "wrong", completely TRUE information, that just pisses me off. If I'm wrong all the time, you should be able to find ACTUAL evidence of such. Not just refer to the other times that you tried to prove me wrong as well.



I will defend my positions until the death, unless you can show me the error of my ways. So do that, but don't stop a random thread so you can take a shot at me in public, because if you try and make me look bad in public that's just going to piss me off that much further.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top