• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!
  • MDMA Moderators: Esperighanto

Trying X for the first time

Status
Not open for further replies.
Folley , this is what i was told when i applied for moderator last year...

Bearlove said:
Hi there, had a feeling that you would be applying.

You have already highlighted my concern with adding you to the crew - your off topic conversations and rants are simply too much at times and were normally left to tidy them up.

I'm afraid that I would not be comfortable adding you to the crew at the moment (its not fair on the other posters who have applied who have been following the rules).

Try and stay on topic and if you still fancy joining the team when the next chance comes along things may be different.

Thanks for your support

Bear
Click to expand...


I didnt get mad, i sent a message back asking specifics on what to adjust to be more helpful, he gave me advice, i tried it, it worked, i dont get angry, i dont ever feel like im getting picked on, and i never feel i need to defend myself, i put everything in the open and so far i havent noticed as many people jumping to your aid as are agreeing that you are often speculative and combative... the only reported posts i seem to deal with are yours, noob mistakes, and occasional sourcing posts... and theres as many in ED from you as the other 2 combined...

If anyone thinks im wrong then report me or simply send me a pm telling me what your disagreement is, i will not retaliate, i can admit when im wrong and if a few people message me suggesting i am i will carefully consider them against my current views... so far i have recieved 0 pm's suggesting im in the wrong ecept by folly and that was only after i messaged him first..
 
Last edited:
And you notice Bear brought it up in PM.


None of this would have happened if you didn't come in here and call me out on that minor, minor detail. I'm not going to take kindly to you bringing out my faults for the world to see. Especially when the "fault" you're talking about is me giving completely true information.
 
How about this analogy: Ask your average billionaire brat about that worldwide economic crisis. They would tell you gtfo, what crisis? They didn't notice any drop in living standard, and all their friends at the yacht club agree regarding this. Live's swell and the polo season is about to start. If you insist, they'd just check with their investment bank and get the satisfying reply that their trust-fund's net worth is higher than ever as is the dow jones. Unemployment is still around 100% though, cause nobody he knows has got a job. 8)

My frog perspective of the same illicit market looks very different from yours, but I don't believe for a second it's an objective one.

Nobody was trying to argue that pills offered at a rave or on in front of a club are commonly of poor quality or don't contain mdma at all. However basing conclusions about a complex economic phenomenon taking place in a clandestine subculture scattered over an entire subcontinent on personal experience, hearsay and rule of thumb doesn't work and the attempt to prove it with adding up a few points from a fragmentary, unstandardised and very tiny body of data leads nowhere.

Alaisdairm doesn't need to prove anything, it's the other way round. He just tried to point out that the percentage of bunk pills on a testing website and your acquaintances opinion on the current molly market isn't really a persuasive argument, let alone irrefutable proof for your assessment. Even if one of the various percentages you mentioned would be accurate to the n-th decimal point, the arguments you used to support the claim were unsuitable. That's all.
 
Fake pills on the east coast have to be above 90%. For every mention of 1 legit press on the east coast I can mention 10 fakes. U have orange gladies which are legit u have 5 differ fake galdies Paul franks ny Yankees yellow shells stars hearts lvs transformers lips 25s the list goes on and on. If anything I think folleys figures were off on the low end by 15% points the proof is right there on pill reports and edata.
 
Folley said:
And you notice Bear brought it up in PM.

None of this would have happened if you didn't come in here and call me out on that minor, minor detail. I'm not going to take kindly to you bringing out my faults for the world to see. Especially when the "fault" you're talking about is me giving completely true information.
Click to expand...

And i brought it up to you by PM first, so have others, there are standards expected of bluelight posts, if you dont like them your free to move to another forum...

speculation is fine if your asking a question, but dont get angry when someone answers it or shoots it down

But dont answer harm reduction questions by saying "you need a test kit, because 70% of pills are bunk"... the first half is good advice... but then they see a number so they ask their friend and their friend says "yea sounds about rite, but you dont need a test kit i can get u dank ones"... nowthat noob is buying pipes... if you really want to be smart amd help people you have to consider yoir tone and sounding overconfident in what you suggest... tbh you sound like a dealer... i dont mean your trying to sell drugs but i mean you exude the same know-it-all attitude and have a quick answer for everything... thats the part thats really getting at ppl..
 
I have a question. Out of curiosity how is folley wrong w his percentages? Isn't proof of all the fakes on pr enough? I happen to think hes wrong on the low end personally. Like I said the east coast has got to be over 90%. The nation as a whole when u include Chicago and cali into the equation w all there legit pills then yea I can see that number dropping down to 70. Hardly anywhere near 51% as someone had claimed.
 
yanker said:
I have a question. Out of curiosity how is folley wrong w his percentages? Isn't proof of all the fakes on pr enough? I happen to think hes wrong on the low end personally. Like I said the east coast has got to be over 90%. The nation as a whole when u include Chicago and cali into the equation w all there legit pills then yea I can see that number dropping down to 70. Hardly anywhere near 51% as someone had claimed.
Click to expand...

Im not saying his estimate wasnt fairly accurate, however it was an estimate, first 70%, then 60%, before feeling comfortable settling on 80%. When questioned later he suggested he "meant more than half"

This thread was about a first timer trying ecstasy... they need to know about pillreports, ecstasydata, dancesafe, and erowid... they dont need people spouting estimates of percentages regarding likelyhood of pills because thats the same pseudo-knowledgeable bullshit talk theyll hear from their local pipe dealer...

Im just asking that he, you and everyone please keep responses to harm reduction questions based on citable facts and not speculation...

Because you by your own admission think he is incorrect by 10-30%... i never said he was incorrect i just asked that he not speculate :)
 
Last edited:
yanker said:
I have a question...
Click to expand...
that question has been answered at least twice in this thread.

i'll echo agnetha's comments here as s/he (are you a he or a she?) seems to approaching this a little more analytically and less arbitrarily and emotionally as users like yourself and folley: "Nobody was trying to argue that pills offered at a rave or on in front of a club are commonly of poor quality or don't contain mdma at all."

it's when you start picking numbers arbitrarily to define "commonly", the conversation starts to break down. folley admitted himself in one post that he meant "more than half" so he wrote "70%". that is the very definition of arbitrary.

i'm paraphrasing now but he also said in another thread that, no matter where you are in america, no matter what pill you have, you have to take 2.

surely even you can see that this kind of unconditional statement not only makes no sense, it's is terrible, terrible advice and it's got absolutely nothing to do with harm reduction?

i don't know why folley gets so angry and combative when somebody simply asks him to substantiate some of his claims - only he can answer that - but there are conclusions that are obvious and perhaps this is not the place to discuss them. there is, to me a shocking lack of humility on display in much of this discussion and that's out of keeping with the general level of solid hr discussion on bluelight.

"Any man worth his salt will stick up for what he believes right, but it takes a slightly better man to acknowledge instantly and without reservation that he is in error." (andrew jackson, 7th us president).

have a great day, yanker.

alasdair
 
But in the name of harm reduction putting up a higher number for newbs to see will hopefully make them say to themselves damn I only have a 2 out of 10 chance of getting a legit pill. Let me buy myself a test kit so I put the percentages in my favor of not dropping something that could possibly kill me. The harm reduction in throwing up high fake pill percentages is to stress u need to test ur shit. I stand by my numbers of 90% on the east coast give or take a few percentage points. Its not a fluke 9 out of ten east coast reports are on bunk pills.
 
All i have to say about this thread at this point is, IM GLAD I LIVE IN CALIFORNIA! ahhahah :D
 
No, because people who visit bluelight to read up on the MDMA before having a go at it were most likely confronted with prohibitionist propaganda at school, on daytime television or documentaries as well as indiscriminate 'drugs are ruining your live' articles in newspapers and magazines. They obviously dismissed the exaggerated reports about the risks associated with the drug, and would not hesitate to dismiss the claim about the abundance of fake pills, if they happen to get decent gear the first one or two times. Because all that scare mongering is just hysteria and bullshit, right? Using made up numbers to warn or scare people only reduces their propensity to heed sound advice from the source who fed them bullshit. Then they'd get sloppy with the whole test kit thing, and you can imagine the rest. Not far fetched IMO.
 
agnetha said:
No, because people who visit bluelight to read up on the MDMA before having a go at it were most likely confronted with prohibitionist propaganda at school, on daytime television or documentaries as well as indiscriminate 'drugs are ruining your live' articles in newspapers and magazines. They obviously dismissed the exaggerated reports about the risks associated with the drug, and would not hesitate to dismiss the claim about the abundance of fake pills, if they happen to get decent gear the first one or two times. Because all that scare mongering is just hysteria and bullshit, right? Using made up numbers to warn or scare people only reduces their propensity to heed sound advice from the source who fed them bullshit. Then they'd get sloppy with the whole test kit thing, and you can imagine the rest. Not far fetched IMO.
Click to expand...



Well if there stupid enough to not take the warning from a bunch of druggies on a drug website who are in the game and have been for awhile then that's on them. U can lead a donkey to water but u can't make em vote for romney. Or sumtin like that. The whole point of bluelight is for harm reduction and if we get one more person
in this country to test there pills then we've accomplished sumtin
 
yanker said:
But in the name of harm reduction putting up a higher number for newbs to see will hopefully make them say to themselves damn I only have a 2 out of 10 chance of getting a legit pill.
Click to expand...
so why, then, don't we just shut down pillreports.com and bluelight.ru and replace them with a landing page that says "there's a 100% chance your pills might be bunk. test them"?

it's because we're having a conversation. the complaint here is that conversation should be based on verifiable information and substantiated claims rather than speculation and fabrication. i agree that overstating is better than understating but they're both a lot worse than confidently stating.

aside, when somebody responds so negatively to simply being asked to back up their claim, something's not right...

if you can tell me where an unconditional statement like "regardless of where you are in america or which pills you have, a double drop is necessary" fits into harm-reduction, i'd appreciate it.

regards

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
so why, then, don't we just shut down pillreports.com and bluelight.ru and replace them with a landing page that says "there's a 100% chance your pills might be bunk. test them"?

it's because we're having a conversation. the complaint here is that conversation should be based on verifiable information and substantiated claims rather than speculation and fabrication. i agree that overstating is better than understating but they're both a lot worse than confidently stating.

aside, when somebody responds so negatively to simply being asked to back up their claim, something's not right...

if you can tell me where an unconditional statement like "regardless of where you are in america or which pills you have, a double drop is necessary" fits into harm-reduction, i'd appreciate it.

regards

alasdair
Click to expand...

That whole conversation bout double dropping any American pill is a completly dif argument. As far as our verifiable and substantiated claims go the proof is right up on pr. Its safe to say as I read every single report that's posted up there that if u went thru them then folley isn't to far off w his percentages. And if u look just east coast reports then u can see I'm spot on w my percentages. So there not speculative assumptions there pretty factual.
There's no harm reduction in sugarcoating the dire crisis there is here in America. If people think they have a 50/50 chance of getting a legit bean there more inclined to pass on the testing. But if they knew the facts that in certain parts of the country there was a 1/10 chance of getting quality they'd have to b a fool to not test
 
Last edited:
yanker said:
That whole conversation bout double dropping any American pill is a completly dif argument.
Click to expand...
perhaps but it informs the argument that folley is way too loose with speculative, unconditional statements to the detriment of the hr-value of his posts.

it's part of a pattern of posting incorrect, speculative, unconditional information, attacking anybody who has the gall to simply ask for some substantiation and stubbornly refusing to accept anything other than his own position (or the opinion of those who agree with him) as the 'truth'.

but hey, perhaps "...they used a higher amount of hydrochloride or something like that when stabilizing it" :)

yanker said:
As far as our verifiable and substantiated claims go the proof is right up on pr. Its safe to say as I read every single report that's posted up there that if u went thru them then folley isn't to far off w his percentages. And if u look just east coast reports then u can see I'm spot on w my percentages. So there not speculative assumptions there pretty factual.
Click to expand...
the only thing that "9 out of 10 pills sent to the lab contained no mdma" proves is that 9 out of 10 pills sent to that lab contained no mdma.

sure, you can draw certain general conclusions by extrapolating from that sample to the general population but agnetha and others have explained why reliance on a single, self-selecting, sample-biased source isn't even a very convincing argument let alone proof of anything.

i get it. you like folley and you think he's right. i guess folley's right and chemically insane, bearlove, darksidesam, agnetha, scureto1, delta_9, tyrone_biggums, Busty St Clare, LuGoJ, TearItDown, Vader, sekio, Epsilon Alpha, Kenaz, and anybody else who's tried to explain to folley thay he's mistaken with regard to some aspect of mdma pharmacology or sociology are just all wrong...

alasdair
 
Actually this has nutin to do w a popularity contest. I'm not sure where u live although I'm assuming u live where ur bio says where u live but I'm pretty sure most of the circulating presses in America are posted up on pr as there are posters from every state in the country. I don't think there are fake presses for us posters on pr then dozens of high quality mdma presses for the masses that aren't posting on pr. That makes no sense. One way or another a pill gets reported on pr and u can bet ur bottom dollar that if its a legit pill it will def b posted up! And I'm not referring to edata as we all know only a small portion of pills are sent in for testing I'm referring to pillreports where almost every pill in circulation gets reported.

And I'm not trying to get pulled into any beefs u got going w folley or any other disagreements u two may have but on this specific topic of percentages hes right on.

Reguards
Yanker
 
Last edited:
i agree that this isn't a popularity contest but a lot of people, some of whom are demonstrably knowledgeable in this area, disagree. that means something. it's even more meaningful when he explicitly invites their feedback and, when they don't agree with him, he calls them names...

to your last post, i agree that the percentages we're discussing are accurate to some extent.

what we disagree on is how those percentages map to the real world. you and others seem to think that they map 100% to the real world which any statistician will tell you is ridiculous. again, others have explained that, because we're talking about self-selecting, sample-biased sources of illegal product in an underground market, there's no way of knowing how accurate those numbers are.

we're not going to see eye to eye on this so i'll agree to disagree.

all the best

alasdair
 
Well we gota make due w the information we have and since I'm confident that almost every pill in circulation gets reported at one time or another on pr then I gota go by those facts presented to me. I'm glad we agree on sumtin at least. Don't let em find out in ce&p ;)
 
Judging by what Americans say on this forum it sounds like there's a lot of fake mandy and pills going about over there.

Don't see many people from the UK and EU complaining.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top