nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Drugs talk

kneemos

Surprised it seems to be OK to talk about how great it is to take drugs(as in the "ideal moments of incredible high" thread) considering it's a thirteen site?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Elmidena

A link would be helpful

kneemos

Elmidena wrote: »

A link would be helpful

Can't I'm afraid,but it's in Ah.

Potatoeman

kneemos wrote: »

Surprised it seems to be OK to talk about how great it is to take drugs(as in the "ideal moments of incredible high" thread) considering it's a thirteen site?

They are just talking about it.

kneemos

Potatoeman wrote: »

They are just talking about it.

Saying how great it is.

Elmidena

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057037251
To save others the hassle of looking.
I also disagree with general promotion of usage posts, one post in particular recommending everyone try E and wanting to get their parents to try it seems to cross the site policy IMO.

Potatoeman

kneemos wrote: »

Saying how great it is.

Just an opinion, Im sure you will find plenty about other adult activities.

humanji

kneemos wrote: »

Saying how great it is.

So? Are people not allowed to have opinions now?

kneemos

humanji wrote: »

So? Are people not allowed to have opinions now?

Well that's the point I was making.Should people be allowed express such opinions where children are allowed access.
It's still an illegal activity.Just seems odd that drug use can be openly glorified.

Cookie_Monster

Elmidena wrote: »

I also disagree with general promotion of usage posts, one post in particular recommending everyone try E and wanting to get their parents to try it seems to cross the site policy IMO.

report that one, it's "advocating illegal activity" and is a card at the least

Dades

The mentions of drugs were just random posts in response to a question which would inevitably receive eclectic answers. I'm sure if the thread descended into comparative stories of drug-taking then the mods would see fit to stop it going in that direction. Though I'd agree perhaps one of those posts might have been snipped.

Sometimes you draw more attention to a subject by censoring it, rather than letting it fade into a general thread.

kneemos

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

report that one, it's "advocating illegal activity" and is a card at the least

I reported it earlier that's why I'm here.

Elmidena

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

report that one, it's "advocating illegal activity" and is a card at the least

Did that before posting here

Cookie_Monster

a lot of that thread has been pruned now by the way

humanji

kneemos wrote: »

Well that's the point I was making.Should people be allowed express such opinions where children are allowed access.
It's still an illegal activity.Just seems odd that drug use can be openly glorified.

Dades wrote: »

The mentions of drugs were just random posts in response to a question which would inevitably receive eclectic answers. I'm sure if the thread descended into comparative stories of drug-taking then the mods would see fit to stop it going in that direction. Though I'd agree perhaps one of those posts might have been snipped.

Sometimes you draw more attention to a subject by censoring it, rather than letting it fade into a general thread.

Why snip it though? They think that people should experience it, but they're not telling people to take it. There's countless similar posts on every marijuana thread and nobody ever has a problem with them.

If many people really have an issue with anyone not condemning drugs, they we'll crack down on it, but it seems a rather insane approach to people not actually doing anything wrong.

hullaballoo

My viewpoint is that the dissent around drug-taking from other members could be considered better from a social policy perspective than pure censorship.

I agree that a thread that descends into story swapping about different drugs/the same drug should be culled but allowing both sides of the divide (and the neutrals!) chime in on the debate might be better from a social perspective; cannabis discussion comes up frequently and it's always useful to get an insight from all sides.

returnNull

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

report that one, it's "advocating illegal activity" and is a card at the least

better call the gardai too ,some one admited to stealing twinks jocks...

kneemos

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

a lot of that thread has been pruned now by the way

All still there.Just something that was deleted earlier.

Dades

If I was going to delete that post recommending everybody try E it would be with a view to keeping the thread on rails. As it happens, it was early in the morning and the thread seems to have faded away anyway, so nothing came of it it seems.

kneemos

Hell of a policy.Swear words are banned but "coming up on crystal meth"is fine.

returnNull

kneemos wrote: »

Hell of a policy.Swear words are banned but "coming up on crystal meth"is fine.

swear words arent banned ,you can get around the filter and not get sanctioned for it.

humanji

Because he was joking?

kneemos

humanji wrote: »

Because he was joking?

Really?

humanji

Yes.

K-9

There's a difference between somebody talking about a drug high on a thread talking about highs, and actively promoting it, no point censoring talk about it either as that doesn't work, drugs education courses wouldn't do that and they'be aimed at over 13's.

[Deleted User]

There are a load of things discussed on this site that are "illegal activities". Speeding (and many other motoring ones). Turf cutting. Downloading movies. Using American Netflix. And many many more on many forums. The biggest example would be that which humanji gave which is "getting stoned".

Do we ban all talk of anything which is illegal? That would be damn near impossible. As long as noone is giving direction on how to carry out illegal activities then it's not over the line IMO.

frag420

There is a thread about what one would do if one were to be assaulted on a night out over on AH.Many replies including my own indicated a retaliatory level of violence( I jokingly said I would set them on fire).

So why is it people smoking s bit of harmless plant stuff that gets people's gruff up yet condoning violence does not? You seem more worried about what perceived harm a person does to themselves as opposed to the harm one could do to another!! And if you are worried about 13 yr olds reading it il assume you will be writing strongly worded letters to various tv stations, programme makers, musicians etc that incorporate drug taking and violence in their art?

Or would asking parents to actually parent their children be too much??

Insect Overlord

kneemos

Deleted User wrote: »

There are a load of things discussed on this site that are "illegal activities". Speeding (and many other motoring ones). Turf cutting. Downloading movies. Using American Netflix. And many many more on many forums. The biggest example would be that which humanji gave which is "getting stoned".

Do we ban all talk of anything which is illegal? That would be damn near impossible. As long as noone is giving direction on how to carry out illegal activities then it's not over the line IMO.

If you're going to have a thirteen age limit then surly you have to be responsible with it.
"Driving through the city at night while on heroin"doesn't compare to Netflix.

Amirani

kneemos wrote: »

If you're going to have a thirteen age limit then surly you have to be responsible with it.
"Driving through the city at night while on heroin"doesn't compare to Netflix.

Where do you draw the line though? At what point does an illegal activity become "too illegal" to talk about?

I think the focus on not allowing instruction or advice on how to carry out illegal activity is ultimately the most pragmatic approach to take. Otherwise you're just banning opinions.

kneemos

NiallSparky wrote: »

Where do you draw the line though? At what point does an illegal activity become "too illegal" to talk about?

I think the focus on not allowing instruction or advice on how to carry out illegal activity is ultimately the most pragmatic approach to take. Otherwise you're just banning opinions.

You draw the line at drug use.
Anything I've seen in the thread could be seen as opinions or suggestions.