Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Poll: Poll: Is there too much illegal drug discussion?
Yes, there is too much illegal drug discussion. --- 38 (28.15%)
No, there isn't too much. --- 97 (71.85%)

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  2    4  5
Author: Subject: Poll: Is there too much illegal drug discussion?
watson.fawkes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2793
Registered: 16-8-2008
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 10-7-2009 at 14:29


I voted no, but then again I don't read organic chemistry topics for the most part. What little has bled over into what I do read has been modest and not particularly different from any other more-or-less open place on the internet.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 12:50


Come on gang. VOTE! I kinow a lot of you don't care one way or the other, but only 30 people have voted so far.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 13:11


Only 30 entropy51?
I had expected people to be "tripping" over themselves to make their mark. . .
Drug-induced apathy no doubt---a salutary lesson?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
solo
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3967
Registered: 9-12-2002
Location: Estados Unidos de La Republica Mexicana
Member Is Offline

Mood: ....getting old and drowning in a sea of knowledge

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 13:16


.....what is your agenda, regardless of the interest of the majority of the members.....you have a choice to read or not to read...there is a whole cadre of chemistry forums, chose and go if not happy here, just like the other fellow that made a long departure....i don;t use drugs contrary to what has been said,but i see no issue in writing about them or researching about them , ...it's science and research, so research your interest and avoid what isn't to your interest ....there are hundreds of members here from the now defunct Hive, and other forums and no one complains about other interests here be it pyro or inorganic hobbies, so why an issue with organic chemistry....your interest will only ignite another feud, unless you have a scientific query as to the findings.....solo



It's better to die on your feet, than live on your knees....Emiliano Zapata.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 13:51


Agenda? No agenda Solo, just trying to inform myself and others who might be interested. It being a controversial issue seems a poor reason to pretend that everyone agrees about it. I'm happy to say that Polverone has allowed me to pose the question, and pretty much everyone has avoided feuding in this thread so far.

If there are hundreds of members here from the now defunct hive they don't seem to be expressing an opinion. I guess members just don't like to vote in polls.

Might it be presumptious of you to say "chose and go if not happy here, just like the other fellow that made a long departure"? It says neither Moderator nor Administrator under your name.

@Hissingnoise, I'm rather surprised at the low turnout as well. I'm sure some members don't care one way or the other, but that's data of a sort in and of itself.

[Edited on 11-7-2009 by entropy51]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
basstabone
Harmless
*




Posts: 24
Registered: 17-4-2008
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 18:46


Honestly, if there was a "just right" option that is what I would have picked. Obviously by my response I would say there isn't too much but there also isn't lacking.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chemrox
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2961
Registered: 18-1-2007
Location: UTM
Member Is Offline

Mood: LaGrangian

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 21:57


A friend here felt there was too much and decided to exit. I felt there wasn't. Some of the discussions that could be labeled as such were in the nature of medicinal chemistry or pharmacology. I don't feel these should be opposed. Also, please recall that some founders and mods are former hive bees. I don't mean to encourage, "how do I make....?" or "I wonder if you could make..... this way?" Types of probes. I feel the policies the board already has serve as adequate checks against these.



"When you let the dumbasses vote you end up with populism followed by autocracy and getting back is a bitch." Plato (sort of)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
turd
National Hazard
****




Posts: 800
Registered: 5-3-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11-7-2009 at 23:19


Quote: Originally posted by entropy51  
Come on gang. VOTE! I kinow a lot of you don't care one way or the other, but only 30 people have voted so far.

Maybe you should finally accept that most people just don't care. This atmosphere of tolerance and openness is what makes this place so unique and great. Everyone is just doing their thing (psychoactives, pyrotechnics, poisons, unusual compounds...) and helping everybody else out. I think it's very unfortunate that Sauron is (no worries, he'll find a way to weasel back) destroying this atmosphere by pitting people against each other. And now you are trying to do the same, by creating rifts where there are none. BTW, I bet both of you are very nice persons, but obviously Sauron has severe mental issues (borderliner or manic/depressive?).

PS: Since it has been made abundantly clear that policies will not change, one needs not to be a moderator to note that you either get more open minded, don't visit the organic chemistry subforum or move on to the new jihadist chemistry forum where your idea of "clean" chemistry is enforced.
PPS: The reason for Sauron's "departure" is not drug chemistry. It's the fact that he can neither dictate policy, nor enforce his personal views, because most people quickly realize that he's simply a madman and ignore his diatribes. What he really needs is a place where people unanimously worship him. I hope for him that he finds some good worshippers (some people need that).
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Nicodem
Super Moderator
*******




Posts: 4230
Registered: 28-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 01:27


Can't we finally get some rest?

Entropy has all the rights to probe the forum attitude in regard to this issue, especially if it means so much to him. It might have been a bad timing to bring up this pool now that some members were personally offended and afflicted after the recent madness, but can we please keep it civil and be relaxed? Let not this poll thread go out of control. If you still feel upset, take a day or more to think it over before posting what you have to say.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 06:32


Thanks, Nicodem. I'm glad to see that people are basically being civil about the question.

If the prevailing opinion is that psychoactive drug discussion is acceptable to the majority then I will try to bow to the will of the majority and tone down my objections.

Maybe it's not a bad thing for the majority to know that a non-negligible minority is put off by it. The ratio seems to run 2:1 in favor, but that's not 100:1 or even 10:1.

@basstabone, I should have included the "Just Right" option, in retrospect. It was not an intentional omission.

@turd who said "Maybe you should finally accept that most people just don't care." The word "finally" suggests that I already knew people didn't care and I didn't kinow that. It's useful to know it, but there could be other reasons for a low turnout, such as fear of expressing an unpopular opinion. Who knows? And the poll isn't capturing the opinions of people who haven't become members because they are put off by the very discussions we are talking about. We don't know how many potential members it's costing us. Or as Chemrox pointed out, some have left because of it.

[Edited on 12-7-2009 by entropy51]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
turd
National Hazard
****




Posts: 800
Registered: 5-3-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 07:56


Quote: Originally posted by entropy51  
The word "finally" suggests that I already knew people didn't care and I didn't kinow that.

Sorry, English is not my native tongue and such subtleties are lost on me. The "finally" was meant as in "I hope this discussion will soon stop".

Quote:
It's useful to know it, but there could be other reasons for a low turnout, such as fear of expressing an unpopular opinion. Who knows?

Far fetched. I don't believe that.

Quote:
We don't know how many potential members it's costing us.

Personally, I'm quite sure that meta-discussions like this, which do not much more than create animosity between members and especially Sauron's flaming have cost much more members than discussion on psychoactives.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
S.C. Wack
bibliomaster
*****




Posts: 2419
Registered: 7-5-2004
Location: Cornworld, Central USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Enhanced

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 09:08


The problem is of course people with no actual interest or understanding of chemistry who post anyways, or perhaps rather people with leech- or spam-type participation here only. It has nothing to do with drugs. To me, this is not unlike the events where the references section became hidden, after someone unwisely brought this forum to the attention of file-sharing sites, and a pair of prolific members of same.

Quote: Originally posted by entropy51  

If there are hundreds of members here from the now defunct hive they don't seem to be expressing an opinion. I guess members just don't like to vote in polls.


Maybe thousands of members here don't give a fuck about responding to you, ("REACT TO ME") or replying to everything that they read that provokes a mental response.
Unfortunately, actually saying so is a bit of a "Catch-22".




"You're going to be all right, kid...Everything's under control." Yossarian, to Snowden
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Magpie
lab constructor
*****




Posts: 5939
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 09:56


Personally, the current level of drug discussion doesn't bother me. Sometimes I'm even curious as to what the cooks are up to now, ie, what's the latest work around to proscribed precursors, or what's the latest fad, etc.

It does bother me, however, that we may very well be driving away talented potential members. Also, I would like the forum to have as good a reputation as possible with the general public and law enforcement. But I wouldn't neuter the forum for this.




The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 12:56


Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack  
Maybe thousands of members here don't give a fuck about responding to you, ("REACT TO ME") or replying to everything that they read that provokes a mental response.
Unfortunately, actually saying so is a bit of a "Catch-22".


Dearest S.C.

Thank you for reacting to me.:P

A pleasure exchanging electrons with you. Were you reduced or oxidized?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
vulture
Forum Gatekeeper
*****




Posts: 3330
Registered: 25-5-2002
Location: France
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 14:51


Quote:

Personally, I'm quite sure that meta-discussions like this, which do not much more than create animosity between members and especially Sauron's flaming have cost much more members than discussion on psychoactives.


Please enlighten me. I wasn't aware of the fact that we were a profit driven media outlet that needs pageviews or members to make money. The surest way to get alot of members quickly would be to post detailed drug synthesis instructions in a protected spot of the forum.

There is also the issue of the question becoming a self fulfilling prophecy. Members will now scrutinize every thread to see if it's in any way related to drugs which they wouldn't do usually, often with good reason.

We are in danger of succumbing to the same scare tactics and faulty logic of those that are trying to eliminate any private pursuit of chemistry.




One shouldn't accept or resort to the mutilation of science to appease the mentally impaired.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
crazyboy
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 436
Registered: 31-1-2008
Member Is Offline

Mood: Marginally insane

[*] posted on 12-7-2009 at 21:24


Personally I don't think there is too much discussion of drugs. I dislike threads asking how to make meth or extract DXM from cough syrup but I think there should be more leeway given to synthesis of less dangerous compounds such as MDMA, LSD, mescaline and other tryptamines and select phenethylamines.

Just like talk about how much AP is used to detonate ANFO in the energetic materials section I don't think it is appropriate to discuss "OTC meth" in the organic chemistry section however many pathways to psychedelics are just as interesting as any other organic compound if not more so.

I doubt my ideas will become a reality at this board but that's fine.




View user's profile View All Posts By User
turd
National Hazard
****




Posts: 800
Registered: 5-3-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 13-7-2009 at 10:30


Quote: Originally posted by vulture  

Please enlighten me. I wasn't aware of the fact that we were a profit driven media outlet that needs pageviews or members to make money. The surest way to get alot of members quickly would be to post detailed drug synthesis instructions in a protected spot of the forum.

There is also the issue of the question becoming a self fulfilling prophecy. Members will now scrutinize every thread to see if it's in any way related to drugs which they wouldn't do usually, often with good reason.

We are in danger of succumbing to the same scare tactics and faulty logic of those that are trying to eliminate any private pursuit of chemistry.

Yes, you are right quality should come before quantity. But note that the argument of scaring away new members wasn't even mine.

And don't you just make the point that I tried to make?
Just look at this thread: http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=12387
I'd call that successfully chased away. There's nothing indicating that this couldn't have become a productive member if instead of chasing him away he was told that there is no reason to be secretive as long as he follows certain rules.

And don't get me started on the absurdity that one might get legal problems if one explains how to distill safrole. Pure FUD which unfortunately falls on fertile ground.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
woelen
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 7981
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: interested

[*] posted on 13-7-2009 at 14:12


I also voted and I voted "No, there isn't too much".

Personally I think that every thread on making drugs and every obvious recipe/cookery thread is one too much, but I must say that the forum community does a good job in discouraging that kind of threads. There might be quite some threads which start with a request for making some obscure drug or a precursor, but almost all of them end up in detritus very soon and the cook or wanna-be cook does not get his answer.

As long as we have a freely accessible public forum there will always be people who want to abuse that forum, but it is my personal impression that sciencemadness becomes more and more hostile towards the real cook-types and that is a good thing. General questions about making amines or about adding acetyl groups to certain types of molecules _might_ be asked with making drugs in mind, but if this is not explicitly stated, then we should bot a-priori call such a thread a cookery thread. A lot depends on the initial attitude of the person who asks questions in this direction...




The art of wondering makes life worth living...
Want to wonder? Look at https://woelen.homescience.net
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 13-7-2009 at 15:42


Quote: Originally posted by turd  

Yes, you are right quality should come before quantity. But note that the argument of scaring away new members wasn't even mine.

And don't you just make the point that I tried to make?
Just look at this thread: http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=12387
I'd call that successfully chased away. There's nothing indicating that this couldn't have become a productive member if instead of chasing him away he was told that there is no reason to be secretive as long as he follows certain rules.



turd, I sure am glad we didn't scare you off. If we had we wouldn't have been able to savor the quality posts of yours, like this beauty:

"IMHO phenylacetone has a very pleasing smell unlike any animal piss. Phenylacetic acid on the other hand I would say has a pissy flavour. But, as opposed to what the rumors say, it doesn't smell very strongly. If you work on large scale, the smell of the solvents is probably a bigger problem"

We need your expertise to advise us about those pissy flavours and what constitutes a quality post.:D




Better to remain silent and appear a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 13-7-2009 at 15:57


Quote: Originally posted by Polverone  

The near-illiterate posts have been stamped out for the most part. If you see new ones popping up, report them and they'll rapidly be on the way to Detritus.


Polverone, please see the post immediately above for an example of the illiteracy that still plagues us. It's not new, but neither is it ancient (nor unique) and it's not in Detritus.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
turd
National Hazard
****




Posts: 800
Registered: 5-3-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 13-7-2009 at 22:19


I don't know what your problem with that post is - the word "piss" instead of "urine" or my imperfect command of the English language - but it conveys more useful information than any post of yours in this thread.

PS: Since you want to bring the discussion to a personal level (a fact that doesn't need to be commented), you should have spent more time reading my posts. Some of them are *really* crappy. Go a head and repost them all. :D

PPS [OT]: I love the smell of phenylacetone. I think a thread on SAR (smell activity relationship) illuminating the relationship between the smell of phenylacetones and the activity of the corresponding amphetamines would be very interesting. And mad science to boot.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Sandmeyer
National Hazard
****




Posts: 784
Registered: 9-1-2005
Location: Internet
Member Is Offline

Mood: abbastanza bene

[*] posted on 19-7-2009 at 08:48


It seems to me that some people have big problem with the amateur discussion on the topic of psychoactive compounds, yet I see no-one of the Saurons zombies complain about BigPharmas blockbuster opioids, benzos and stimulants. So, if you're an amateur you better shut up on these issues - this discourse is reserved for the big boys with billions of dollars. This is utter confusion about what this forum is about (amateur science), and I don't understand what those who have been so deeply indoctrinated to hold this view are doing here and how come they are the ones to speak about the elements "destroying amateur science". It is extremely ironic. And by the way, every second joe-sixpack trying to change the forum-policy to fit his political views has become far more annoying (and destructive) than occasional cooks wanting to be spoonfed with meth recipes.

BigPharma vs. Cook:

The Emperor says to the Pirate: "How dare you think you can molest the seas!"
The pirate replies: "I am but a man with a small boat, so you call me a pirate. Yet you have a vast navy, and they call you an Emperor? How dare you think you can molest the world!"

[Edited on 19-7-2009 by Sandmeyer]




View user's profile View All Posts By User
setback
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 50
Registered: 17-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 19-7-2009 at 09:51


Chicken Littles like entropy do far more harm than anyone else here.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
starman
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 318
Registered: 5-7-2008
Location: Western Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 20-7-2009 at 18:11


Well of the 58 people that voted it seems to be running about 70/30 no/yes.Given that on a typical day 100+ plus members visit the site it would seem most are simply content to leave these decisions to adiministration and moderators or couldn't care less either way.

[Edited on 21-7-2009 by starman]




Chemistry- The journey from the end of physics to the beginning of life.(starman)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
nightshade
Harmless
*




Posts: 26
Registered: 14-11-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-7-2009 at 09:06


I asked a question concerning a kolby reaction,and someone shut down the thread.Why because concerned a paper by chem guy about oxidation reduction with phenylalanine.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  2    4  5

  Go To Top