Been dying to respond here but like an idiot I fucked up my laptop keyboard (overzealous cleaning with fucking hand sanitizer and after all these years should have know better) (still not sorted i.e. have to strip the fucking thing sometime today).
Anyway. Been monitoring this thread and have some input.
It's taken me some time, since I started here, to get the gist of these forums. At first (and given my reason for becoming and active poster) I thought they were a God send when it came to matters of extractions and the like. But I'll admit I got a bit confused, and still am, when it comes to harm reduction insofar as the forums are concerned. I mean to say: define harm reduction?
I've read so many threads where a forum member is looking to potentiate the effects of a substance (various). Does responding to those types of threads constitute harm reduction or encouragement and promotion? Fine example: there's loads I DO NOT post here (believe it or not) because I don't know where that line in the sand is. For better or for worse: I'm sitting with papers (not some untried and untested backyard mechanic type shit) that range anywhere from potentiating the effects of Cocaine (none of which have been mentioned but have been scientifically tested) to purification techniques to extraction techniques to syntheses of a few substances that would make your eyes water. The collection of this data for a number of reasons (not least of which my interest in all of this shit of course and not to mention I've for sure had the fucking time on my hands this year thanks to this fucking virus). But as I say: where do you draw the line?
The above came home to me last night actually while I was reading through some thread, going back years, where the idea was to post pics. of those that had passed due to OD's etc. Very few pics. were posted but there's more than a few very detailed posts where names and exact cause of death are detailed. And in just going through that thread: there's LOADS of OD's that were attributed to bad shit and/or dangerous cuts and adulterants (not that many from simply using, on its own, the deceased's DOC on its own and assuming a certain level of purity). So where's the line i.e. detailing a synthesis, for example, that would result in a pure product for use (given that the user is going to score ANYWAY and who knows from which source and what quality and what it's going to contain)? Is THAT harm reduction or not? Not to mention the number of members that, as far as I can tell, are getting ripped blind financially for something that could potentially kill them.
Not sure about any of the above i.e. been a constant internal deliberation.
Anyway. I guess my point is that in spite of my joking around here sometimes I wasn't joking on one point on this particular thread (something along the lines of which
@Alex_1991 alluded to in point 12. As for the legalities: I know not (although that said this is public information i.e. believe it or not and if you're committed enough and spend the time then you'd be surprised at just how much scientific information, on nefarious topics, is out there and hidden under piles and piles of arbitrary shit).
Anyway. I'd be keen to see some input here on this. Because as per
@Alex_1991's other post of yesterday (well done to you by the way) it's time also for me to stop fucking around and wasting time on topics that really don't have any bearing on my life or well being (not to mention joking around and sometimes, and in so doing, possibly causing more harm than good albeit unintentionally and without malice). Could well end up in me having to start something myself i.e. no way I'm letting all of this shit go to waste.
