Crackdown on drugs at Hypography

Lately there have been a lot of threads and discussions about experimentation with drugs for obviously non-scientific reasons. The admins and moderators, and several concerned users, are taking steps to stop this trend.

First of all, we will be adding a clause to our rules:Click here to read the entire article

I was going to put something about this in my first post, but I didn't have enough time to think of how to say it well. Questioning whether or not drugs should be illegal is, in my opinion, okay, with conditions. There is a difference between certain logical arguments ("Why have alcohol legal and marijuana illegal?") and certain emotional arguments ("It opens up your minds and lets you see new dimensions that you can't otherwise see"). The first is a logical argument that can be backed up with facts, experiments, statistics. The second isn't even verifiable. There is also a difference between making it personal and making it vague in that regard ("I should be able to smoke" vs. "Smoking should be legal"). The first, while not necessarily bad in and of itself, has led to some undesirable discussions, and hence we would watch that thread carefully. The second is preferable.

Gotcha.

Everyone bear in mind too that it is not a black and mild (oopss...sorry...) black and white issue. As with any new implementation, there will be some things still uncertain. The basic premise to all, and the context to be remembered is...

Please, regardless of what you are discussing, keep it scientific. Mentioning that you do one thing or another in context of an otherwise scientific post will not (IMO) get you banned or the post deleted.

If my understanding of the regulation is accurate, which of course it may not be which is why such decisions are made by the entire team of admins and mods, then each will be taken in context.

OK, either I didnt know that or had forgotten.

Yes there is a difference. I am not worried about going over the line myself and just had a point to ponder.

Okay what?

I'd like to make a point about equality on both opinionated sides.

I agree that people shouldn't come here and talk about how "cool" their trips were. There should be no promotion of any drug.... Simply facts about drugs in the name of medical science.

"We welcome drug related discussions as fits naturally when talking about medical treatments, scientific experiments, and effects and costs of drug abuse on society."

This statement implys that you can talk about the negativity of drug ABUSE has on society.

I believe we can all agree on what the definition of drug ABUSE is.... but we all have different opinions of where the line is between drug user and drug abuser.

I would like to make it clear to everyone that if it is considered wrong to promote the use of recreational drugs.... then it should be equally wrong to Demote the use of recreational drugs as well.

We should only be allowed to put forth cold hard facts about drugs.... and not impose our opinions on anyone else. This is a science forum.... so, I don't want social discrimination of either side.

COLD HARD FACTS. Leave the opinion up to the reader. That's it.

Case in point-

I don't want to hear anyone say "people who use ___ recreationally are good for society because...."

And I equally don't want to hear anyone say anything like "people who use___ recreationally are bad for society because...."

only fair?

thank you for getting that across.

I think DCM makes a good point.

Of course, posts that make scientifically unsupported statements about drugs (eg: “all licit drugs are beneficial and harmless, while all illicit drugs are detrimental and harmful” or “LSD has been shown to cause damage to somatic and germ DNA” or “marijuana cures cancer”) can expect to be criticized. However, there’s a human social tendency to avoid criticism of scientifically invalid statements that coincide with present of past statement of authority figures – call it the “keeping your head down” or “going with the herd” instinct. People who aspire to scientific and intellectual integrity must resist this tendency, striving for impartiality and to overcome prejudices they may have acquired from trusted but fallible sources, such as parents, teachers, and clergy.