Sciencemadness Discussion Board - phenylacetonitrile lockdown

phenylacetonitrile lockdown

contrived - 16-12-2007 at 00:11

a member had started thread on phenylacetonitrile with some chemistry questions and was shut down with a glib we don't like drug threads. I thought that was a bit less tolerant than I'd like us to be. The member didn't say anything about drugs he just cited PiKHAL. I doubt if sci.chem.org would be that anal. Let's lighten up please.

MagicJigPipe - 21-12-2007 at 01:33

I want to second that. I have attempted synthesis of benzyl cyanide before and have no intention of making meth (isn't that what it's used for?)

solo - 21-12-2007 at 03:43

Many threads have been closed because of narrow mindedness .....not all chemicals have one particular use......aside, science to me means to investigate regardless of societies myopic view .....I myself, as a bee like clandestine chemistry ...I don't use drugs, but I still enjoy the mystery and challenge of synthesis, but then I'm also enthused by the other types of synthesis both in inorganic and organic chemistry. The forum has recently been riddled by this type of discussion and it takes away from the spirit of science and dwells into philosophy and personal views ....all fine, but not in a science forum.....save it for the pub or your friends........solo

Sauron - 21-12-2007 at 04:37

It's Polverone's board, and he can run it as he sees fit. It is not a democracy..

The thread author was stimo-roll, his reaction was from erowid and PIHKAL, he wanted to substite potassium tert-butoxide for LDA.

Another member pointed out to him that the prep clearly stated that purification was difficult and yield poor, so why bother.

Forum gatekeeper vulture pointed out that t-BuOK will not work, and closed the thread.

I concurr with vulture that this was a drug cook working from drug cookbooks and without a clue, therefore seeking spoonfeeding. IMO that is why vulture shut the thread down.

I see nothing wrong with the status quo of moderation. A better informed thread on phenylacetonitrile would not likely be shut down. The stuff is versatile, I have a couple liters sitting around myself. And I am no drug cook. It is used to make the excellent peptide reagent Boc_ON.

[Edited on 21-12-2007 by Sauron]

MagicJigPipe - 21-12-2007 at 09:11

OH! That thread. Ok, I now know of what you speak. I thought he was talking about a different thread.

Polverone - 21-12-2007 at 09:41

I would not have closed that thread personally, but the other members of the moderation team operate using their own discretion and I will rarely attempt to challenge their judgments. If vulture felt that particular thread started off on the wrong foot, so be it.

Sauron - 21-12-2007 at 09:50

Again, phenylacetonitrile (benzyl cyanide) is not a particularly blatant precursor (unlike, say, P2P) and an intelligent and competent discussion without requests for spoonfeeding would probably make no waves. IMO solely of course.

Org Syn has straightforward prep scale procedure for this compound from benzyl halide. No need for erowid, etc. and an inferior process fraught with problems.

Where I am, benzyl chloride and bromide are verboten but benzyl cyanide is OK. Go figure. So I just buy it. But if I wanted to make it I'd follow garage chemist's suggestion and start with benzyl alcohol.

MagicJigPipe - 21-12-2007 at 13:15

Benzyl alcohol + HCl was how I got to benzyl chloride. That's a lot easier than chlorinating toluene IMO (especially determining how much chlorination has taken place). Then of course just follow Org Syn procedure to benzyl cyanide.

My personal experience will not be very informative since it was so long ago and with such small amounts. Too bad this is on forum matters. I'd like to see some experiences.

chemrox - 21-12-2007 at 22:38

well I think we beat this one enough. I was relieved to see Polverone's response.

Sandmeyer - 31-12-2007 at 05:48

Yes, that thread could result in an interesting discussion, I'm glad someone started this thread. PiHKAL should maybe avoided in the title if threads are to survive

.

I'm away from lit search during holiday, but if t-BuOK is to be used it would have to be in the form of LiCKOR (superbase n-BuLi/t-BuOK), I don't think that t-BuOK alone is powerful enough, but even with LiCKOR there might be problem with lithium-halogen exchange. There is a really cool synthesis of ibuprofen from p-xylene using nothing but LiCKOR chemistry, with LiCKOR being capable to deprotonate -CH3,

but this is getting off-topic.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
Again, phenylacetonitrile (benzyl cyanide) is not a particularly blatant precursor (unlike, say, P2P) and an intelligent and competent discussion without requests for spoonfeeding would probably make no waves. IMO solely of course.

Org Syn has straightforward prep scale procedure for this compound from benzyl halide. No need for erowid, etc. and an inferior process fraught with problems.

Where I am, benzyl chloride and bromide are verboten but benzyl cyanide is OK. Go figure. So I just buy it. But if I wanted to make it I'd follow garage chemist's suggestion and start with benzyl alcohol.

Wake up from that fantasy world.

The problem was not to prepare phenylacetonitrile, but to prepare a phenylacetonitrile with that particular substitution pattern on the the ring.

Hence the need for route other than benzyl halide/cyanide Sn2 which any tweaker is familiar with.

[Edited on 31-12-2007 by Sandmeyer]

Sauron - 31-12-2007 at 19:50

Smell the roses. Vulture booted the thread. Take it up with him, not me, if you have the balls, which I seriously doubt.

Sandmeyer - 1-1-2008 at 15:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
Smell the roses. Vulture booted the thread. Take it up with him, not me, if you have the balls, which I seriously doubt.

Why would I contact him, I was speaking to you? Contrary to what you seem to believe, I have no irrational fear for moderators. It is obviously your problem since you're kissing their ass every second post.

[Edited on 1-1-2008 by Sandmeyer]

Sauron - 2-1-2008 at 04:18

sandmeyer, I have no regard for you. But it is obvious that you have enough for yourself to go around.

As far as I am concerned, you are and always have been an irritating nonentity. Screw off, why don't you?

Here's my "ass-kiss" of the day

Vulture was right to shut down the thread inquestion. He not only was within his prerogatives as a mod, he was objectively correct and acted properly. I don't care how many smarmy apologists for druggies, like sandmeyer think otherwise. You guys can take yourselves elsewhere and do the rest of us a huge favor.

Polverone and the moderators have achieved a bananced fair approach, but that does not satisfy the sandmeyers, they winge and whine over every cook thread that gets shut down. It's sickening.

Ramiel - 2-1-2008 at 09:16

And lo, Ramiel descended from mount Cyanide...
Stop with the inflammatory comments and name calling. I'm a vengeful Mod, and I'll lock this one too if you can't converse like scholars.

vulture - 2-1-2008 at 15:05

The thread had all the red flags of cookery and the author clearly didn't have a clue about chemistry, nor was he showing any intention to learn or adapt, so it got closed.

I wish a had a falsified method to determine if a person is a cook or not and whether the thread is rubbish or not, but I'm not a FBI profiler and even they get it wrong. So I have to rely on personal discretion. And I still think it was a good call to close that thread.

But perhaps I should stop locking threads to prevent discussions from going out of hand and just blocking the offenders for a while instead?
And my personal discretion is NOT influenced by the post count next to your name...

[Edited on 3-1-2008 by vulture]

Organikum - 22-1-2008 at 09:31

Vulture, are you sure you are not just a terrorist sympathisant promoting poison and explosives chemistry?

Take some LSD to lighten up.
Dont forget your valiums and chill the fuck out.

Sauron is a fascist. It would be appropriate to block him for two weeks every time he posts in a thread without contributing but just bitching.

Cant you see it? "Divide et impera" Soccer mom policy. the drug chemistry comes first, the poisons next and then the explosives are shut down. As soon amateur scientists allow to get divided they are doomed alltogether.

/ORG

PS: Can somebody answer me the simple question how somebody who pretends to be a legal chemist with a legal business can contemplate to scratch matchbox strikers to get red phosphorus? Why not just buy it? You dont have to fear a visit from the goverment Sauron or do you? Hypocrite. I am more legal then you have ever been. Why did you run from the USA? What are you afraid of?

PSII: And all of you be assured, that drugs, MDMA and speed are more enjoyable for an individuum and for the public then nerve poisons and explosives are. Just try it. But its all just chemistry and everybody has to start somewhere. Just dont tell anybody where.

On new years eve after having ingested some highly illegal homemade mindaltering substances and after having had some highly enjoyable sex my girlfriend and me went out to celebrate the new year on the main square just to watch some idiot blowing his right hand to pieces injuring unrelated bystanders with some homemade fireworks.
Nevertheless I dont jump into the explosives forum and start bitching. Maybe I should.

[Edited on 22-1-2008 by Organikum]

kmno4 - 22-1-2008 at 18:23

Quote:

Originally posted by solo
The forum has recently been riddled by this type of discussion and it takes away from the spirit of science and dwells into philosophy and personal views ....all fine, but not in a science forum.....save it for the pub or your friends........solo

Bingo.
It shows clearly weaknesses of moderating at this forum. That is all I wanted to say.

solo - 22-1-2008 at 18:49

Quote:

Cant you see it? "Divide et impera" Soccer mom policy. the drug chemistry comes first, the poisons next and then the explosives are shut down. As soon amateur scientists allow to get divided they are doomed alltogether.

...........................Org.

It's true this forum is being polarized by recent voistrous new members with the intent to make the forum to their liking......this forum has always been open to all types of ideas and has been a home for many Hive members for years......as well as members from many other forums......it's the freedom that's felt here ....something that has been falling because of infiltrations from moonies and the type, wanting to wield their will on the forum......it's our home! and it's worth fighting for..................solo

chemrox - 22-1-2008 at 21:15

Overzealous efforts to exclude drug chemists has created a sense of hypervigilence and intolerence. I saw many older threads that indicated an earlier openness I feel we should try to retrieve. Sasha Shulgin would have been run out of here under the standard applied when the phenylacetonitrile thread was locked. Maybe the forum stewards should meet and agree before taking such dire actions.

I edited to add a quote that seems apropos:

He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
~ Albert Einstein

[Edited on 22-1-2008 by chemrox]

Organikum - 23-1-2008 at 02:23

I dont remember the exact quote but it goes somehow like this, IIRC it was from a catholic referring to Nazi germany:

"When the came after the communists I stayed silent for I was no communist. When they came after the jews I stayed silent for I was no jew. When they came after me nobody was left to speak up."

Sauron - 23-1-2008 at 09:57

I am neither a fascist nor a moonies, but I feel strongly that the druggie-chemists and cooks are destroying everything that we hold dear.

I see Orgie waits till my attention is elsewhere for a few days before he barfs up his bile.

Anyone who thinks that I am influencing the policies set by Polverone and implemented by vulture, has his head up his ass. Obviously I do not have the ear of the court. I was suspended for a week for stating my case too loudly and too often.

But I'll tell you something. I am not the only member who hates the druggies and their entire subculture. Far from it.

PainKilla - 23-1-2008 at 10:16

I lurk much more than I post, mostly due to the fact I've little to add to many threads - that is, I either try to post information that is pertinent to the topic at hand or I don't post at all.

How I wish this was the case in general.

It's really quite a tragedy to start reading a thread and then see it deviate off-topic because members X,Y,Z do not agree with topic W.

Everyone has their forte, likes, and dislikes. I fail to see how it is relevant to the discussion of scientific topics.

There is good reason for drug, explosive, and poison threads that do not discuss a topic in a scientific manner to be locked: the original posters either should not have the information, or are intending to use it for purposes that I think we can all agree will likely end in some sort of misfortune...

So there is good reason to moderate such threads. But drugs, explosives, and poisons are all a part of the world of chemistry. I fail to see how we as scientists, constantly assign their intrinsic societal worth to this forum where everyone clearly has their own subjective opinion. And an opinion has little place in the discussion of chemistry, which is a science, and so is not meant to be significantly subjective.

This is all to say: if you don't have anything to add, other than your opinion or a random comment, why bother posting at all? It does not add anything at all to discussion but rather deviates it off topic so that next time someone tries searching for that information, they instead find a flame festival - and then start a new thread and cause the process to begin anew.

Anyone who is not a moderator that has a problem with a thread should PM the appropriate moderator with the concerns: neither the OP or anyone replying with useful information cares about your (contrary) opinion, so please don't ruin the thread with useless banter.

If a topic is covered once, thoroughly, a thread asking a common question can be locked under the guise of UTFSE, which all people should do before starting a new thread to begin with... and it eliminates these discussions, which, from my observations, seem to occur every single time a thread on a drug, AP, poison, or any other "societal taboo" is discussed.

And this banter degrades the forum - for most members - much more than any thread on a nerve agent, explosive, or drug might. Sure, there may be legal concerns, but the moderating team here is well aware of the fact, so please, for us members, let's stick to the discussion of amateur chemistry in a scientific fashion, and not the possible practical/societal consequences of it's application.

Organikum - 23-1-2008 at 15:09

Thanks PainKilla your words are better than I could ever say it.

Sauron, just because I am the one who is swinging the axe doesnt say I am alone. I dont hate you, as hating is for the weak in mind. Hating makes a person suffer, so I am happy to hear that you hate us. For it doesnt bother me and it makes you sick. Enjoy!

/ORG

chemrox - 23-1-2008 at 19:12

I consider Sauron to be a friend and a major contributor here. I couldn't disagree with him more on this topic. Regulation is the mother of tragedy not the other way around. There are huge profits in wars and the WOD is no exception. So that's my little piece. It's not what I'm here for. I feel that slamming the door on a topic or flaming the writer because there's a drug, poison or explosive being considered is excessive and amounts to censorship. Every board, forum, etc has a flavor. We're not in any danger of changing the flavor. Newbies pick up on the nuances after a few days or weeks. Medicinal Chemistry is a noble art as are pyrotechnics and toxicology. When people are new they don't know how to put things to be in line with the norms here but they learn in a few weeks. Meanwhile, why be rude, mean, judgmenta? Also, the censorship creates an environemnt of hostility and repression that was never intended. I'm pretty sure Polverone wouldn't have shut the acetonitrile thread and I think it was a knee-jerk on a bad day on Vulture's part. I hope so. Let's be more open not less. I have already stopped myself from contributing a number of times. And I'm not here to give my political views...I wish the need wouldn't come up.

Sauron - 23-1-2008 at 20:36

chemrox, this thread is not a debate about the WOD. It is a concealed attack on the policies of Polverone and the action of vulture. Well, vulture has explained himself.

Those who want to blame these policies and actions on me, like Orgie who calls me a fascist, are being disingenuous. Contrary to their insinuations, I have nothing to do with formulating policy on this board. Far from it.

Polverone has struck a balance between making this a nest of drug cooks and making this a safer place for real chemists. Well, the drug cooks and their fellow travellers and apologists don't like it. IMO tough shit. Those of us who would prefer to see even stricter action, also chafe, but, for my part, I can live with the status quo.

The drug cooks are destroying our hobby. They are doing lots of other damage, needless to say. but what concerns me most is that THEY are destroying OUR hobby.

PainKilla - 23-1-2008 at 20:59

Sauron, I share your concerns, however drug chemistry is one of the main driving forces of chemistry. To say that anyone that discusses drugs is a criminal is not accurate. For example, I am studying pharmacology and find the chemistry and action of drugs to be very interesting, and I do not see anything wrong with that. I hope you also do not have any qualms in this regard.

The way I look at this is that this issue would not be an issue if it were not for the legal restrictions placed upon drugs. For if there was no legal implications to our discussion, then what exactly can be "wrong" about it?

I do agree that the cookery threads have no place in this forum because they do not warrant the time of any of the members here. Anyone interested in that sort of thing should seek help elsewhere. The real concern here, is what constitutes a legitimate interest in the chemistry and what is merely treading over ground that's been trodden by real chemists ages ago...

I don't think anyone is trying to promote Wet Dreams-esque discussion here, I think rather it's a concern that a thread was closed that may have had real interest behind it.

I agree - tough shit. Vulture closed it because he saw it as necessary.

I think anyone who has their thread closed should work harder to not f*ck it up next time around. UTFSE, try harder next time to promote a legitimate discussion.

As long as we keep to the discussion of chemistry I don't think anyone is in a position to complain.

For example, you find nerve agents interesting right?

I personally find them interesting, but I don't see a point to discussing them in a public forum because there is no one who is (in)sane enough to make them at home. But I do not find it necessary to post and derail a thread simply because I disagree with it.

You may share the same view when nerve agents are replaced with drugs. Drugs make up a larger facet of our society, and thus have much more influence both politically, and socially.

But no matter how much you separate "us" and "them", there are *chemists* that find drugs and their chemistry interesting, and I don't see how it is our place to apply ethical restrictions on what is ("naturally") found in our world.

We are all in the same boat (note:we chemists, not cooks), and we should work to make everyone happy... I would rather educate someone more prone to "cooking" to have a legitimate chemistry interest because in the long run, this is much more beneficial than sending him elsewhere and then having him convert to a "real cook" and really bringing misfortune upon us all...

Anyone who is not in it for the chemistry... well, they have no place here. Everyone else has a chance for redemption... why not help to facilitate that redemption?

[Edited on 24-1-2008 by PainKilla]

Sauron - 24-1-2008 at 00:58

I am not talking about medicinal chemistry or pharmacology. I am talking about STREET drug cookery. It is disingenuous to pretend that you do not not know or recognize the difference.

I am really tired of being Orgie's judas goat and punching bag, as I am not the point man on this issue. If anyone does not like Polverone's policies, take it up with Polverone. If you don't like vulture's calls, take it up with vulture. Call them fascists, why dont you, Orgie, and see how far that gets you.

This punching bag punches back.

PainKilla - 24-1-2008 at 05:51

I do know the difference; from what I know, Org. has the impression that you do not - thinking that you chastise both regular cooks and medicinal chemists. Or perhaps that the distinction medicinal chemist is too highly reserved.

In any case, can't you both just ignore each other?

This entire affair would have been avoided, and no punching bags of any sort would be needed if we stuck to chemistry. And it can be further avoided by NOT attacking each other, but rather just respectfully ignoring one another.

If there is a problem, just PM the mods, and that applies for everyone.

I should compile a list one day, of all the threads closed due precisely to random attacks on each other...

But seriously, I hope no one responds to this and we just keep our opinions to ourselves, and discuss *chemistry*. Remember, the better man is the one that forgives and moves on.

The alternative is to open another board where we can just attack each other 24/7.

[Edited on 24-1-2008 by PainKilla]

Sauron - 24-1-2008 at 06:00

I have since my student days (long gone) enjoyed reading medicinal chemistry. I have nothing but admiration for medicinal and pharmaceutical chemistry and chemists. However I do not include clandestine producers of "recreational" compounds in that category. That is all.

Nicodem - 24-1-2008 at 10:59

I think the point PainKilla was trying to explain is that when the concept of law and legality is excluded there is absolutely nothing relevant that differ a meth cook from a pharmaceutical industry manager. Obviously both have the same goal – to make money at the expense of human misery – though one does that better and more cleverly than the other.
Now, given this is not a forum about law, but about amateur science instead, it would be nice if some members would stop playing the prosecutor and some posters stop posting questions on how to increase their profits. It seems to me that both law enforcing and profit making are equally out of place here. So, for what regards my taste, I would like this forum to continue throwing the cookery threads to Detritus and do just the same with off topic law discussion (section "Legal and Societal Issues" excluded, of course). But I highly encourage any scientific discussion about mind altering drugs, especially about psychedelics. Now, this is obviously a very personal preference, but I do not mind others discussing other questionable stuff either as long they do it using scientific discourse. Also, I don't mind the warnings that something might be illegal in certain countries since the posters should be aware of the legal aspects of their actions (I often give such warnings myself), but I find it really hypocritical when someone (ab)uses law as an argument to promote censorship or otherwise tries to exclude discussion about drugs/explosives/toxins…

Back to the original issue…
The phenylacetonitrile thread was indeed likely to deviate into inane cookery discussion, but regardless of the high probabilities that was only one of the possibilities. It might have also taken other directions but since it is now in Detritus, we will never know.
What is at stake here is whether this "preemptive strike" moderating policy should be implemented or not. Based on my anti-imperialist prejudices, I vote against it.
I think every idiotic cook deserves a chance to at least try using scientific discourse. If he is unable to do so, his posts will go to Detritus anyway while he will move over to WetDreams to enjoy the level of discussion appropriate to his own handicap. The system of exclusion as is set now is functioning already – no need to implement irrational and self mutilating policies.

[Edited on 24/1/2008 by Nicodem]

PainKilla - 24-1-2008 at 11:53

Very well said Nicodem; the issue at hand seems to be that we have members that are interested in the money and not the science: this forum is not a place for them.

For those interested in the science, there should be no limits placed upon the realm of science, provided the discussion is thorough and up to par.

As a practical consequence: please do not add your opinion to a thread if it has nothing to do with science, but rather your own personal stance on an issue. For example, I as Nicodem find psychedelics to be an incredibly interesting aspect of modern psychopharmacology and as such would gladly participate in their discussion and synthesis should such a topic be created. While I do not support explosives and poisons as much, I still respect their place in the world - I will not post and criticize the effort of others in those fields.

So let's remain objective and allow everyone to dwell in the fields they know and love - and act as a commune - for we are after all interested in the common science of chemistry.

And for everyone not interested in chemistry, rather cooking: your thread will probably be locked and you might be banned. Try harder next time, and maybe learn some chemistry/science in the process. Thanks!

[Edited on 24-1-2008 by PainKilla]

MagicJigPipe - 27-1-2008 at 17:13

I would like to add that I completely agree with Nicodem. Even though I no longer have very much interest in drug chemistry (especially psychodelics) I respect others who do as long as they are interested in the science of it (and even in personal recreation). I think if someone bases their morals on laws then their morals have low value. Morals should be based on personal objections, not on what the government thinks is "right and wrong".

Now, of course, in the same sense, the owner of a BB should be able to run it as he/she sees fit. Polverone does a really good job but there is always room for improvement. That's the purpose of constructive criticism. In my opinion, as long as what someone is doing isn't hurting others then it's okay (most of the time). At the same time, letting "cookery" threads exist on this board will only damage our credibility. The current system seems to be working well although I think we could be slightly more leniant on what is considered a "cookery" thread and what isn't.

P.S. Believe it or not I didn't always think this way. I used to think all illegal drugs were inherently bad and all that mumbo jumbo. That is, until I started to look at the big picture. It's just not that simple and if drugs are bad because they can hurt people then what else is bad because of that same reasoning? Guns? Chemicals? Anything? I believe that consistency in one's belief structure is also important.

Instead of hunting down these "cookery" threads before they occur, maybe we should let them occur and then lock them before they get out of control. Doing away with something just because it CAN make a turn for the worse doesn't make sense to me.

Sauron - 28-1-2008 at 06:35

Nicodem, you can express your opinion, and welcome, but the issue is not being voted on. After all the forum is not a democracy, it is a benign dictatorship. Neither you nor I are likely to alter that status quo. Nor will anyone else except, of course Polverone.

You are quite correct to point out that drug cooks are not amateurs, but entrepreneurs and as such, foreign to this forum.

I disagree that pharm company staff are profiteering on human misery; quite obviously the pharm industry profiteers on alleviating human misery. There is a valuable distinction there. While we can nitpick about various errors in the past that reversed this, e.g. thalidomide, I doubt that anyone would dispute that on balance the good record of the pharm companies outweighs the bad, by a large multiple in fact.

Whereas drug cooks definitely do profit from human suffering, and often add to it with impure, indidious products. A drug cook may eschew a single recrystallization while the pharm industry does rigorous HPLC prep scale purification.

So I think your equivalence argument falls flat. Drug cooks are not pharmaceutical chemists under the skin.

leu - 28-1-2008 at 17:39

Quote:

I disagree that pharm company staff are profiteering on human misery; quite obviously the pharm industry profiteers on alleviating human misery.

That's a rather strange view since many of the millions of Africans that have died from AIDS would still be alive except for the threat of trade sanctions:

http://www.globalissues.org/health/aids/
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Corporations/AIDS.a...
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Corporations/Medica...

:mad:

Sauron - 28-1-2008 at 18:00

Crap. How many might be alive if the leader of South Africa would admit that AIDS exists and accept free medications that Mbeki is an idiot.have been offered?

MagicJigPipe - 29-1-2008 at 00:43

Drug companies aren't bad because they cause human misery the same way that marijuana farmers aren't bad because they produce a psychoactive substance. Legal drugs, just like cannabis can be bad or good. It's the end user (and in the case of legal drugs, the doctor) that determine that. Maybe, we should be placing more responsibility on the sometimes idiotic doctors that prescribe medication that causes harm.

That's why I hate all these anti-smoking ads. We all know smoking is bad for you. It's just the way they go about trying to turn people against the tobacco companies. It's pure propaganda and sometimes pure lies. To them the end justifies the means. They're going after the wrong thing. Instead of addressing the problem of people smoking in the first place, they're blaming the cigarette companies. It's the same as blaming gun companies, pharmacuetical companies and coca farmers. They're just supplying demand. What matters is the fact that we WANT these things. If nobody wanted it, the suppliers would go away. It's called will power. If you don't want to smoke, buy guns or do drugs don't buy them! If you can't help yourself, work on improving yourself to where you can have the willpower to quit. If you have to rely on something to be non-existent to stop using it what does that say about your will power and your ability to conquer obstacles and accomplish tasks?

Anyway, I'm done. I know people will disagree but debate is good for you and it doesn't exist if everyone agrees.

vulture - 29-1-2008 at 15:09

Quote:

What is at stake here is whether this "preemptive strike" moderating policy should be implemented or not. Based on my anti-imperialist prejudices, I vote against it.

I wouldn't call it a preemptive strike. The member who posted that thread wasn't banned or sanctioned, just got his topic closed. He (or she) is free to repost it in a different style and we'll see how it goes. But somehow they never do.

Perhaps you should take a look and see how many drug related threads are still being allowed in the organics section. There are quite a few.

LSD25 - 12-2-2008 at 05:05

Quote:

Yup, cos orgsyn wouldn't have a straightforward synthesis of nasty things like P2P would they?

http://www.orgsyn.org/orgsyn/orgsyn/prepContent.asp?prep=cv2...

As to phenylacetonitrile - why not start with bloody phenylalanine and be done with it?

And as regards the locking/banning of threads, I believe my perspective on the subject is already on record and well known. That said there is no need for me to say anything further.

Nicodem - 12-2-2008 at 14:42

I find it hypocritical that this now made famous phenylacetonitrile thread was closed while there are at the moment several threads opened by "swimer" members with obvious retarded cook-style content left active and apparently unmoderated.

Is this some new forum policy?

PS: If it is just the consequence of moderators not having the time to check all the posts, then I apologize (and just ignore this post).

Magpie - 12-2-2008 at 14:48

Perhaps vulture just likes to play with his food. He is letting them "swim" for awhile before the kill.

LSD25 - 25-2-2008 at 18:29

SWIM (

) says that the discussion of ANYTHING and EVERYTHING which is, could be or even might be of some use to non-amateur drug cooks should of course not be discussed here. There are other, more appropriate venues for such discussions. This will keep the peace and preserve the sanity of this forum.

It would be nice if the members here who are so easily offended would avoid offending themselves and others would refrain from citing the various Rhodium mirror's, but of course that is never going to happen.

This forum can then be more socially responsible, assisting both amateur chemists and Bin-Laden wannabees to learn about the other aspects of chemistry without the repetitive and inane divergence into the condemnation of drug-cooks. Perhaps this will enable the community as a whole to get past the argumentative bullshit?

PAX

MagicJigPipe - 26-2-2008 at 20:23

Unfortunately, the line between "drug cookery" and legitimate drug chemistry is a fine one. Your seemingly intolerant view toward the subject is interesting given your username, LSD25. Perhaps we shouldn't allow names like that to exist on this forum so we appear to have absolutely no connection to drug chemistry of any kind. Next we'll just get rid of the energetics section of the board since it's just as "bad" and illegal.

The way it is now seems to be working. Why impose more restrictions? People are going to think we're all terrorists and drug cooks no matter what subjects we're posting about so, FUCK 'EM!

[Edited on 26-2-2008 by MagicJigPipe]

froot - 27-2-2008 at 06:41

The topic, although it is locked, is not in Detritus. Perhaps someone who is able to make a contribution to the topic that will pull it out of the twilight zone and up to this board's standards should send a u2u to the mod that locked it and request that he unlocks it and try get it on track. I wouldn't be suprised if he obliges.
If nobody can contribute, leave it, the question has been answered anyway.

Simple.