The SUSPENSION of illicit drugs/mind altering substance topics on ATS (The experiment failed)

It comes down to protection for the site/ site owners. They have a cash cow here and more than likely don't want to risk losing it or getting fined down the road. So it makes sense that this is how its going to be.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by ghaleon12]

reply to post by ravenshadow13


Seemed to work in the 9/11 forum. What's the difference?

I don't see what the big problem is. Lay down the T&C and if anyone violates it by mentioning their own experiences, delete the post.

Am I over-simplifying this?
Heck, I'll volunteer for monitoring.

I just think completely banning the discussion of a topic on a site such as ATS is contradicting of it's mission statement ... or, at least what the official slogan would lead you to believe ATS is all about.

Anyhow, we're past the whither-to's and why-for's and are now headed in the right direction. Our disagreement is no longer valid discussion on this thread.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by tyranny22]

reply to post by pieman

Select four or five members who are sincerely concerned about the conspiracy and cover-up stories within drug topics, pharmacology topics

-Skeptic overlord.

Page 12 my friend.

reply to post by tyranny22


Oh, yes. I do suggest that they place long-time moderators familiar with moderation methods in charge of moderating said new-boards. Their positions in other boards may or may not end up being filled by new moderators.

Originally posted by tyranny22
reply to post by ravenshadow13

 

Seemed to work in the 9/11 forum. What's the difference?

I don't see what the big problem is. Lay down the T&C and if anyone violates it by mentioning their own experiences, delete the post.

Am I over-simplifying this?
Heck, I'll volunteer for monitoring.

I agree. The simple solution to this is a War on Drugs forum. Strict T&C. No personal experiences. If necessary, restrict it's threads from being featured on the front page.

Honestly i wouldn't mind being in the committee.

But it has to be up too the posters, and the Owners. Please pick the most unbiased people, that is what we want neutrality.

reply to post by darcon


you yeah, right, okay, i missed the tree for the woods, thank's.

Could you be a bit more specific about the 'illegal' aspect.

You say no discussion on illegal substances, even if they are legal where the poster is posting from ....

Is it the server location (where is that?), or the ATC company registration that denotes jurisdiction.

Also, could you please clarify the issue as to substances that are deemed illegal yet also occur naturally in the human body, ie. '___'?

Is it the reference to the chemical that is now banned or the reference to the recreational use of it?

Not trying to be argumentative ... seeking clarity.

How about we give some time for nominations and then we can put together a list of nominees and vote for 5 of them?

How much time should be allowed for nominations?

I'll volunteer to put the list together from the nominations in this thread.

Just to state Skeptic's instructions again:

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Select four or five members who are sincerely concerned about the conspiracy and cover-up stories within drug topics, pharmacology topics, and the "war on drugs." You'd have our commitment that myself and Springer will be involved, as well as at least three other staff members with a similar desire. Within the private DISC form, we'll discuss strategies to get these topics back onto ATS, and if we can agree on a way to do it, we'll do it.

Work together to choose the best member participants, and we'll start immediately.

It's really just intended to be a small enough group of people to allow for a strong interaction with senior staff.

As a member of DISC back in 2004 I can certainly say that it was really a small core group of members that were able to get things done. It's just a lot easier to formulate ideas and present them properly when dealing with a small group. That's why it's so important that those nominated be people who can calmly and rationally set forth their ideas and are not coming in with any sort of "stupid money hungry mods, I'll show 'em how it's done" type attitude.

The final goal here is going to be one that benefits everyone. A positive attitude and a genuine caring for this community are two common sense requirements for those who want to help propose something for the community.

I look forward to it.

reply to post by Reddupo


Maybe if we can all agree on that solution now, a committee won't be necessary. Is there anyone who doesn't think that a board dedicated solely to illicit drug related issues and strictly moderated by senior moderators is a good idea?

I think that discussions about medicinal use of marijuana for the treatment of disease and also the use of medications like Prozac to treat psychological disorders should be restricted to the Medical board. If any discussion about these substances is not specifically relating to their medical and legal use, then the posts should be deleted. Perhaps an increase in moderation in the medical board would also be necessary on a smaller scale for this reason.

It should not be like RATS in the sense that it requires points to participate. I think that may distinguish it too much from the other conspiracy topics. And since many think it is a very important issue, it would be unfair to discriminate it from others and ask for points to be able to use.

[edit on 2/25/2009 by ravenshadow13]

reply to post by Reddupo


War on Drugs Forum sounds good.

Their should be some ground rules of course, like no silly posts, like the ones that got us here in the first place.

Kind of like RATS, but more clearer and defined.

reply to post by Djarums


Sounds good. But i think this group needs to be on ATS often. Not a member who comes here monthly, but a member who comes here daily.

reply to post by nyk537


nah it won't be complaints for a few days it'll be complaints as long as the policy exists.

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by Reddupo

 

Maybe if we can all agree on that solution now, a committee won't be necessary. Is there anyone who doesn't think that a board dedicated solely to illicit drug related issues and strictly moderated by senior moderators is a good idea?

The committee's purpose is to formulate good ideas, and this has already been formed. I'd like to know what the board owners think of this idea?

Maybe some sort of site-wide vote is needed?



[edit on 25-2-2009 by Reddupo]

I'd love to do what it takes, to give my opinion of how I think it can be discussed constructively because there is so much I have to say. I think there is so much beneficial information, as well as warnings. I have been around drugs and drug users for a while, and as much as I'd like to see drugs go away forever.. i feel there are some that need to be defended deffinately.

In my opinion if it grows on the ground, and little is done to alter it, its for us humans to explore, cautiously and maturely.

One member brought up the fact that certain chemicals already exist in the body, and say taking a tribal brew for a purely spiritual experience can enhance it. But my arguement to THAT..also IS... that with meditation you can make your body create more of this chemical!

So although i'd recommend the meditative route, i dont see harm in a little plant, that actually mind you.. they give to you in HOSPITALS.. in peru its a medicine, and they look down upon those who use it for recreation. And they aren't lying, it heals you. Everyone pukes their guts up, I didn't, but it fixed my stomach, and the next day you feel amazing. They give it to you in hospitals.

I think what I'm getting at is some things have gotten a bad label, and I for one would like to see SOMEONE, ANYONE.. bring this to light.

And hey, if this turns a bunch of people into drug abusers, come find me I'll be your guidance councelor, its what I do here. haha

Well anyways, i'd like to help in any way I can to allow it to be conducted in a constructive order.


We're nominating people now?
Hmm, I guess I should skim back and read more posts. I've been making vids.

Peace, ATS.

Originally posted by darcon
reply to post by Reddupo

 

ground rules of course, like no silly posts,

LMAO. Now, now ... we couldn't make a rule such as that.

After you're done with this thread please check out this thread.

reply to post by Reddupo


Yes, and I'd like to know if there are any members who don't think that would work, or would rather have something else? I personally don't see any problems with it, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any that I'm not seeing.

reply to post by Springer


I see no problem with it. Most of those discussions only ended up with posts that did not follow the T&C anyway.

Good move!

Cheers!!!

reply to post by ravenshadow13


I agree, i would like to see someone against that notion.