Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Crackdown on drugs at Hypography


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#35 Boerseun

Boerseun

    Phantom Cow of Justice

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6062 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 02:57 AM

Heck, man, how hard can it be?

Interesting to note that you support 'responsible' kids and adults on drugs.

If it's controlled, its controlled. End of story.

And though it may not be easily definable, its kinda like porn: You'll know it when you see it. And seeing as we don't want to soil the minds of the innocent and inquisitive kids who might join our discussions or lurk in the background, if you cross the line, we'll just have to open a can of whupass on your derierre.

As simple as that, really. And that's about it.

So wonder no more.

I'm just incredibly tired of the whole issue, and of explaining why we're doing what we're doing regarding this.

But judge it by the results: Go to any one of those free-flow anything-goes forums, and see if they can maintain any sort of a serious discussion beyond the first three posts, before the first idiot says how cool weed iz, an' trippin's da bomb, and all kinds of mindless crap. If free drug and trip discussion and the promotion thereof is your thing, then, well, Hypo is simply not the site you're looking for. And I don't think we're gonna change that. We've set a high standard, and we've spent a lot of time maintaining that standard. We're not going to bend on this particular one.

That's about the long and the tall of it, I guess.

#36 IDMclean

IDMclean

    A Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1670 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 04:24 AM

Interestingly reactionary on your part Boe. I believe that had you read the entirety of my post while holding your judgments until the facts are in then you might have actually responded to what written.

Nowhere in my post did I say I support "free drug and trip discussion and the promotion thereof".

I did say that: "I support responsible kids and adults on drugs."

Right now, I am making use of a drug called "Ibuprofen" which is good for treating inflammation and is a non-steroidal pain killer. The context of the above use of the word drug refers only to the legal definition of a drug. That which prevents, treats, or cures a disease or enhances well being.

Colloquial use of the word drug differs widely from formal use. In policy and litigation formal use is preferred and a clear cut definition is a must. In the world of medicine and law it is important to distinguish between "drugs", "substances", and "controlled substances."

Coffee in this case is a substance like pie is also. Ibuprofen is a drug and non-controlled substance. Cannabis (Schedule I), Cocaine (Schedule I & Schedule II), Meth (Schedule I & Schedule II), and Heroin (schedule I & IV) are all controlled substances.

All I am asking for is that the moderators of Hypography draw the line clearly. I am unclear what any of you would consider "Drug Abuse" or even what any of you would consider a "drug" or an "illicit substance". I want to know the exact longitude and latitude of the boundaries created by this injunction. It is what I have come to expect of the intelligent people of Hypography: formal and well defined arguments with clear concise elements backed by collaborative empirical evidence.

Proud D.A.R.E. drop out, leading by example, and staying clean of bad substances.
-Ian (KAC)

#37 Racoon

Racoon

    Politically Incorrect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3800 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 08:55 AM

To be on the safe side, you should refrain from posting about how jittery your caffeine buzz is, and how the stack of Aspirin is kicking that back pain in the ***!
:)

If you want to get Baked or Trip out, thats up to your voluntary discretion; but basically the point is to stop creating threads about it, and discuss any medical or social concerns in the threads already created...

#38 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:47 AM

All I am asking for is that the moderators of Hypography draw the line clearly. I am unclear what any of you would consider "Drug Abuse" or even what any of you would consider a "drug" or an "illicit substance". I want to know the exact longitude and latitude of the boundaries created by this injunction. It is what I have come to expect of the intelligent people of Hypography: formal and well defined arguments with clear concise elements backed by collaborative empirical evidence.

So you're arguing that unless a rule can be defined explicitly without room for discretion that it is invalid? Are you arguing in favor of the "LawN'Order Republicans" up the road in Oroville that there should be no judicial discretion on sentences for drug possession?

Being able to find limits in our rules as currently stated is an intelligence test: "Inconsistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

The upside of this is that if you're slightly over the line, you'll get a private warning to move back inside the yellow line. That's *much* better than getting banned for an inadvertent use of the word "weed," don'tcha think?

But really, the question here KAC is why did you even bother to ask? There's obviously another shoe left to drop and maybe you should expose it, because I get the feeling from your careful wording its likely to be a much bigger issue than simply "I can't figure out what I mayn't talk about."

And of course you *could* ask one of us in a PM: that would be the *polite* thing to do! :(

Civility sometimes requires polite ruthlessness, :)
Buffy

#39 Tormod

Tormod

    Hypographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14353 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 12:12 PM

For the record:

The "no pro-drugs discussion" line is agreed upon by the moderators, regardless of our personal views on drugs. It is simply because we - as a team - do not have the time, nor resources - to constantly monitor our boards for irresponsible drug talk. There was a period when this was a problem here at Hypo. The crackdown ended it.

There is no clear line. If you think you're crossing it, ask any moderator before you post. If you *know* you are crossing it, don't post. If you *want* to cross it, our rules allow the moderators to cancel your membership. It's, as always, up to you.

#40 Moontanman

Moontanman

    Unobtainium...

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9029 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 12:25 PM

I disagree with this stance on drug discussions, while it is important for people to realize that drug use is always harmful on some level that applies to both legal and illegal drugs. About twenty years ago a study was done and it concluded that for every person who dies from the direct result of illegal drug use about one thousand die from the effects of legal drugs. I agree that glorified stories of drug use should not be on this list, or any other for that matter since most of these stories are lies or at least boasting by people looking for attention or some one who has an axe to grind.
Drug use is usually done to as a form of escape from the daily grind that is much easier and less costly than say a ski trip or some other form of entertainment. That doesn't make it necessarily ok, it's just that not every has the time or the means to have the sort of good clean fun that is approved of. For myself I am an adrenaline junky. I love to get that feeling that I have just cheated death. Nothing is better than that high and I get it by riding motorcycles fast and hard. From the perspective of danger to others I am a far greater threat than some stoner sitting in his living room trying to figure out how to make hash brownies taste better. Possibly there should be a part of this forum that only adults can see and reply to. There are exclusive forums already. It wouldn't hard to make one more. Making it so that discussion of drug use is forbidden is just censure ship. What is next? No discussion of sex? Censure ship is always a double edged sword and is often used as a weapon against those we don't approve of. As an example cannabis became illegal not because it was killing people or harming anyone. It was thought at the time that mostly Mexican immigrants used pot and the start of the ban on C. sativa was an excuse to harass and deport illegal Mexicans in the south west. From that small beginning it grew into the monster the war on drugs is today. So many people have had their rights stripped from them, put away in jail cells to rot just because their idea of fun wasn't climbing a rock face with no safety lines, roaring down the side of a mountain in the snow, or some other form of recreation they cannot afford or have no interest in. That's why they call them recreational drugs.
Yes they are dangerous, living is dangerous, everyone should have the right to decide the amount of danger they are willing to risk. If someone dies while doing something dangerous like scuba, nascar racing or some other dangerous but approved way of having fun it's so sad but if you die from a drug overdose everyone thinks he got what he deserved.
Let's go slow on anything that resembles censure ship, you don't cut off your nose to spite you face. Discussion of drug use that doesn't have a bad ending is frowned on everywhere but drinking tales are often glorified even though more people die from the effects of alcohol than any illegal drug!

Michael

#41 InfiniteNow

InfiniteNow

    Suspended

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9148 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 01:06 PM

There's a pretty clear distinction between, "Dude... DMT will open your mind and everyong should try it. I do it all the time, so it's clearly safe," ... and... "I found out recently that DMT interacts with the brain in these three ways. A study showed that this causes a, b, and c. I found that interesting, and wondered if that could also be used to treat..."


Use your head, and if you don't like it, go elsewhere.

#42 freeztar

freeztar

    Pondering

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8445 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 01:22 PM

Shouldn't this thread be closed as there is nothing further to discuss here? :)

#43 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 01:30 PM

I disagree with this stance on drug discussions...

Cool! Notice we let you state your opinion!

I agree that glorified stories of drug use should not be on this list, or any other for that matter since most of these stories are lies or at least boasting by people looking for attention or some one who has an axe to grind.

Look carefully at the examples and you'll see that that's exactly what we're saying.

As I said, this is an intelligence test.

Making it so that discussion of drug use is forbidden is just censure ship. What is next? No discussion of sex? Censure ship is always a double edged sword and is often used as a weapon against those we don't approve of.

To make this clear: this is an administrative--and to a certain extent *legal*, because the server sits within the jurisdiction of the US DEA and their sometimes looney sense of propriety--injunction, *not* a moral one. We proscribe this because it fits the desires of our target demographic: that is, we're making it "safe for women and children." As such, you'll find that we have a rule against pornography and we reserve the right to determine what that is too.

It is *counter* to the stated purpose of this site to let people talk about anything they want, whether it is good or bad. We actually go out of our way to accommodate "non-science" topics in the Watercooler and The Lounge, which is far more than other sites do, precisely because this is a place where people socialize, and we know there is more to life than just science. We frown on swearing and lots of other activities that are not in line with our goals, and throwing epithets at us like "censorship" is obnoxious and completely out of line.

No one is forced to be here, and as such, we're under no obligation to "protect" anyone's "free speech."

Let's go slow on anything that resembles censure ship, you don't cut off your nose to spite you face.

And that's why--to go back to what KAC asked--the rules are a bit fuzzy.

Honestly, we *like* our noses. And if we didn't, we'd claim we had a deviated septum and get a nose job, just like any self-respecting celebrity. :)

If you don't like the weather, move, :(
Buffy

#44 Moontanman

Moontanman

    Unobtainium...

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9029 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 02:02 PM

I stand corrected, censure ship was a strong word. As long as I can discuss the possible medical benefits of something that may not be approved of in the general population I am happy. Promoting drug use has no place here any more than promoting NASCAR racing does. Drug use is a sticky topic and often degrades into unsubstantiated argument as much as religion vs science does. I wonder if someone was promoting the use of alcohol or cigarettes would be subject to this rule? I Would hate to think that political correctness is in place here so I won't accuse you of it. It would be nice to know where the boundary is located but that would take the fun out of exploration, wouldn't it?

Michael

#45 Tormod

Tormod

    Hypographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14353 posts

Posted 07 January 2008 - 03:09 PM

I wonder if someone was promoting the use of alcohol or cigarettes would be subject to this rule?


I think it goes without saying that when someone here tells us they are up for a game of football and some beer, it isn't exactly a socially unacceptable thing to do. If they however tells us how cool it is to watch football while you're stoned, it's a completely different thing.

I Would hate to think that political correctness is in place here so I won't accuse you of it. It would be nice to know where the boundary is located but that would take the fun out of exploration, wouldn't it?


If this site were politically correct, we'd all be evangelical capitalists touting Truths and call for mandatory life sentences for illegal immigration.