Open Discussion Why is synthesis discussion not allowed?

Nexus_Tripper

Nexus_Tripper

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
490
It makes no sense that discussion of extracting drugs or growing drugs is allowed but synthesis is banned. Moderators often say "bluelight isn't meant to help you make or get drugs", but if that was really the case, extraction or growing discussion wouldn't be acceptable.
 
Performing a cold water extraction or learning to make kratom tea is far less hazardous than doing something like boiling hydroiodic acid reductions or Grignards, where if you screw those up you make a hideous mess or a fire.

Doing things like cultivating opium poppies and large-scale cannabis grows are frowned upon here too, because someone caught operating a large scale grow could reasonably implicate BL in the process.

Extraction of drugs kind of implies you have the plant material or whatever in your possession anyway. And it often can remove harmful impurities (e.g. cocaine acetone washes, making DMT from acacia, etc).

Moreover, it's not like there aren't other forums out there that DO allow this kind of stuff... you just need to look around.

I'll turn the tables here: Can you come up with a reason why we should allow drug cultivation and synthesis discussion?
 
sekio said:
Performing a cold water extraction or learning to make kratom tea is far less hazardous than doing something like boiling hydroiodic acid reductions or Grignards, where if you screw those up you make a hideous mess or a fire.

Doing things like cultivating opium poppies and large-scale cannabis grows are frowned upon here too, because someone caught operating a large scale grow could reasonably implicate BL in the process.

Extraction of drugs kind of implies you have the plant material or whatever in your possession anyway. And it often can remove harmful impurities (e.g. cocaine acetone washes, making DMT from acacia, etc).

Moreover, it's not like there aren't other forums out there that DO allow this kind of stuff... you just need to look around.

I'll turn the tables here: Can you come up with a reason why we should allow drug cultivation and synthesis discussion?
Click to expand...

I see people extracting DMT or Mescaline often, both of those extractions are very dangerous and often use serious solvents, acids, and bases. I could see what you mean in your first line if only extremely basic extractions (e.g: making teas, opiate CWE) were allowed, but this forum allows hazardous, complex alkaloid extractions. Synthesis implies that you have the precursor and everything too. And synthesizing your own product is much safer than taking random things. It doesn't make sense to not allow synth talk here.
 
^It should be seen as a given that people will try to extract chemicals for their own personal use from plants. The main dangers associated with extractions are lack of education regarding safe techniques. I think Bluelight would be remiss to forbid such discussion.

Its hard to argue that synthesis is really going to result in anything but more unknown drugs being released to support a black market. As much as I am personally glad that people are synthesising certain drugs in commercial quantities, I think, as Sekio said, that its a legal but (maybe more importantly) also ethical area outside Bluelight's stated aims. Hard reduction is for the individual user, not so much for the commercial supplier. At least that's how I interpret the rule.

edit: the only reason I could see for synthesis discussion would be to try and get in before the less scrupulous do and try and disseminate techniques for creation of drugs with improved safety profiles and condemn drugs that seem dangerous. But that is so prone to exploitation and consequences that could negatively impact Bluelight and individual users. I think it takes an ethical stance that sits uncomfortably with the idea of harm reduction.
 
Last edited:
willow11 said:
^It should be seen as a given that people will try to extract chemicals for their own personal use from plants. The main dangers associated with extractions are lack of education regarding safe techniques. I think Bluelight would be remiss to forbid such discussion.

Its hard to argue that synthesis is really going to result in anything but more unknown drugs being released to support a black market. As much as I am personally glad that people are synthesising certain drugs in commercial quantities, I think, as Sekio said, that its a legal but (maybe more importantly) also ethical area outside Bluelight's stated aims. Hard reduction is for the individual user, not so much for the commercial supplier. At least that's how I interpret the rule.

edit: the only reason I could see for synthesis discussion would be to try and get in before the less scrupulous do and try and disseminate techniques for creation of drugs with improved safety profiles and condemn drugs that seem dangerous. But that is so prone to exploitation and consequences that could negatively impact Bluelight and individual users. I think it takes an ethical stance that sits uncomfortably with the idea of harm reduction.
Click to expand...

"It should be seen as a given that people will try to extract chemicals for their own personal use from plants". Not really. Most people don't do any chemistry on drugs they use. Synthesis is no different than extraction. Some people synth things for personal use and some for sale. Some people extract things for personal use and some for sale. The compounds (ex: phenethylamines, Fentanyl-type opiates) I make are not for sale and would likely be very dangerous in the hands of an irresponsible individual (as is the case of DOTFM-DFLY, ultra nanogram-potent fent analogs, NBOMe analogs of DragonFLYs and FLYs or bomamines with complex substitutions 2C-I-NB4I2OMe (2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodo-N-(2-methoxy-4-iodobenzyl)phenethylamine).
 
Last edited:
nexus tripper said:
Synthesis is no different than extraction.
Click to expand...

Its hard for me to believe that you would make that statement and then talk about the drugs you've synthesised and keep a straight face. But we'll pretend that those incongruous statements didn't happen. You claim to synthesise small quantities of recreational drugs for personal use. Over the years at BL, I've encountered 3 or 4 people who have said they are synthing for personal use. I've encountered heaps more extracting.

Sure, you could say that the synthesis discussion you would like is in regards to making small recreational quantities for your own use. That's a slippery slope and would be very difficult to moderate. How can anyone tell if they are helpfully advising someone like you or someone making commercial quantities? I think it would cause legal issues for Bluelight if there was a connection with the actual manufacture of drugs. Its a huge conflict of interest. The info here is accessible to pretty much everyone but Bluelight aims to help the user, not any other participant in the drug supply chain.
 
it's a question of where the line is drawn. bluelight has evolved over a long time and that's where we draw the line, for the reasons that willow details.

you would draw the line in a different place? that's fine but, when it comes to bluelight, the bluelight staff will make the final decision on where the line is drawn. historically, we've tended to err on the side of caution. if you disagree with our decision, that's fine too. we'll agree to disagree.

thanks for the feedback.

alasdair
 
You know how the CIA has black sites? Well bluelight does too ;)

Also, Rhodium's archives on Erowid are still a gold mine for many things, maybe sometimes older drugs, but hell, if somebody decided to mass produce 4-methylaminorex, up here, I'd be happy.

When alaisdairm (is he Alasdair Milne from the UK government in the 80's, the guy who got sacked for doing the right thing or something? :p ) said what he said, it sounded so much like Hamlin when he was play-pretending to be the biggest asshole possible to Jimmy(Saul) in Better Call Saul second-to-last episode. Hehe, although I know you're not faking it, it's a lot like "the partners have made a decision, and that's it!".
 
Well bluelight does too
Click to expand...

That's not us, but this is the right direction in which one should look. . .

Some people synth things for personal use
Click to expand...

This happens so statistically rarely that we should ignore it when fashioning site policy. Also, those competent enough to perform such are likely able to seek sources superior to any discussion that occurs here (or if not, they really should be); you want advice from chemists, not armchair SAR-speculators (of which I am one).

ebola
 
Well, whatever ANYBODY does, read the MSDS of the chemicals your working with. In fact, this is the BEST insight into the dangers:

pipeline.corante.com/archives/things_i_wont_work_with/

FOOF is the only onomatopoeic chemical I can think of right now. It was a proposed rocket propellant. The guys behind this class of chemical tend to be a little odd.

http://web.gccaz.edu/~wkehowsk/ignition.pdf


Strangely, it's often a chemical that a chemist uses regularly that catch them out, sometimes with fatal results. Last case I heard was in Australia (I think) in which geological samples were analyzed. hydrofluoric acid was used every day... but this one day, the victim got mixed up and poured 100mg onto his right leg. Leg amputation came too late; they died. I'm still constantly amazed how pupils in the US seem to acquire very dangerous chemicals, don't read the MSDS and end up dead. I know one girl freaked when tert butyl lithium sent out a gout of flame from the needle (in MSDS) and manage to get burned to death with an emergency shower 10 feet away. Some reagents just disappear as their dangers become fully appreciated. An accident in Holland with 'Magic Methyl' killed 1 but also resulted in Methyl fluorosulfonate being withdrawn from market even though it had been in use for some years. I note that the hypervalent iodine oxidizing agent are falling from grace.
 
THE_REAL_OBLIVION said:
You know how the CIA has black sites? Well bluelight does too.
Click to expand...

Subtle lol.

Let me try one.

Many good points above, but basically, synth discussion could attract a bad element and the wrong kind of attention ... we wouldn't want to "bee" in danger of the sort of attention that brought down certain now long defunct communities from back in the day.
 
random post:

I used the word synthesis recently but should have used the word process. (processing to be precise)

apologies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top