lmao!  Ok to clarify a little what I'm thinking, I totally agree with GM about the signal to noise ratio here and I would like to think it can be maintained with a bit of gentle modding

esspecially if there were easy to follow procedures that started with ingrediants so comman there would be no reasonable way for them to be regulated.  I like the idea of the place being the forefront for over the counter drug chemistry.

 Yeah, i.e. over at SM there is a thread about AA that runs to 26-7 pages, but REALLY, aside from much banter, the 'essence' of the thread "could" be trimmed down to the few procedures which ARE feasible, which IIRC would be less than 3pages to cover the 3 or 4 methods shown to be viable for the home chemist

 And this is just one of MANY similar threads all over/around the clanchem community...shit evn the data on Rhodium could be consolidated to provide a clearer path to happy dreams

   THE problem for most noobs is wading through the masses of data to find the gems...the not so well known methods. I know for fresh in the early daze much of these sites might as well have been written in Hebrew, when it came to deciphering wtf was being said around these fora
    Not the chemistry so much, as the "implied" knowledge shared by members in an esoteric way...ok maybe once this worked to thwart LE but these days they kno it ALL, shit I've had members share forensic journals with me that speculated on what drugs were coming next
   The only 'safe' way to play these days is just "Dont get caught"  Fark the analogue act down here has EVERY compound and EVERY moiety  covered..even ones which as far as anyone knows has no been synthed

Have you considered inviting some big names like Dr. Nichols, Rick Doblin etc?

Great Idea and aside from these guys being 'time poor'.. I dont see why not!   In fact it wouldnt surprise me if he were to point some of his graduate students here (if they're not already floating around )

a whole new idea, and essentially rebuilding the forum - not something I am going to do, as it might (likely) fail and be reduced to nothing.
Don't fix it if it isn't broke, right?

  Its NOT 'broke' so this isnt a 'fix' but 'modifications'...like doing up a car, its to make it 'better'....(my Queen )

.....actually, i will give you the link over at SM where you will get a feel for what occurred....`i'm also solo at SM.....

thanx java i shall check it out with great interest...In some ways I feel I missed some interesting times of the last decade but I'm not the only one

The bottom line is that this endeavour to synthesize MDxx type compounds, I believe, could be simplified and refined

this couldnt bee a bad thing and in itself would attract more hungry wasps when they hear the "good oil' can be found here

Its good to hear the buzz of members interacting



 

thanx GM I hear you loud and clear, and you make many good points with which I agree, and pretty funny too.

You know I hate to admit it but you have addressed the worst aspect of "sharing the love" at  ANY level, man! the fuckwits are ubiquitous. That said, I would like to hope there are already enough places on the net for them to go, and maybe the "best" way to moderate them, is by osmosis and natural selection. Trolls get no truck here because no one will bite. Ignored they go away.
 
  I agree we dont wish to cater for 'cooks'  however many of us resurrected rusty old talents when we got here and there is a LOT to read. I was thinking of not so much a beginners section, as an intermediate one

  I have seen many potentially very interesting members who no longer log on here, as to why, idk, many reasons I guess.

 But there is much to be said for the 'persistent' member, who you can see is trying to the best of their ability, there's more to this gig than just chemistry as GM says it takes

  some clandestinely inclined individual  is willing to get his/her hands dirty through partaking in this hobby, then minimum level of enthusiasm,dedication, intuition, intelligence and common sense should be assumed on their own behalf.

and quite a bit of initiative and effort to even get to the start for making MDxx and I think most peeps who get this far could often use some more help and direction.

Its hard to ask about something you dont quite understand, especially if when the terminology of chemistry is saturated with synonyms and esoteric terminology, which many of the texts to which GM refers are filled with with synonyms
 Its amazing how many ways the chemistry community can say the same thing--lets just try and simplfy things a bit

Possessing just 2 of the above named qualities should be enough to allow anyone who chooses to do so, the ability to sniff out these "nuggets" and put whatever 2 + 2 together to suit their individual requirements.

    maybe,   I guess the point I'm trying to make is that there's a lot of stuff to wade through to find something doable.
and combing threads here and there which are well written and easy to follow and migrate them together into something a little more digestable and concise.

 This pastime doesnt suffer fools gladly. Its funny how we all seem to have 'gotten away with' some pretty stupid shit but a lab seems to blow up more often these days, unless its just they just went unreported a while back, but no I think it was becoz it used to be easier to get good equipment than it is now, especially when you're going as otc as possible. I can imagine several ways to disaster due to unexpected flaws in the equipment, let alone stupidity.

the OTC route is not so straightforward, like many things it requires a bit of skill in a few areas, and I thought this was the home of high quality ghetto chemistry

 I dont want to see anything change except to refine and maybe (hopefully possibly ) simplify this realm.  There are many levels of knowledge on these fora (fresh is but a bottomfeeder) and depending on your own knowledge of chemistry as to where you start...this would be for those who fit the 'specs' outlined not for fools.

And now I'm not sure of anything  your words are wise GM but maybe we will do something not yet done

I so I DONT want this place to even HAVE members who ARE members of the zoklet worlds--forgive me for not having spent a lot of time online reading the posts of fuckwits like this . .please pardon my ignorance here . . . and  we can certainly do without this...

Along with them come the 3 page cookbook style writeups on how how to pull piperine, coupled with 27 page long threads comprised of questions like " What brand pepper is best" or "where can I buy a socketset apparatus OTC" and dicksising contests over who grows the most neon yellow piperine crystals.

maybe we could just consolidate a bunch of the best available BASIC data on precursors solvents equipment procedures etc wack it all under another thread name, and suggest that any newbs spend some time there if they feel the need, and maybe provide that thread with its own Q&A section

just some ideas

yeah peace

fresh

I'd just like to see a bunch of the more 'viable' processes related to this topic in one place.

As mentioned there  is  SO much data around it takes a huge amount of time to absorb...and I wonder how many peeps start down this road only to give up due to lack of time to do so?

If this hive is going to be around for some time, then having something like erowids chemistry library, in another section would be great, where methods and techniques are consolidated

ones like this for example http://www.erowid.org/archive/rhodium/chemistry/peracid.html (and this is only one of many choice articles scattered about)

 

If Im reading you right, I think you are advocating for something along the lines of Labtops  "Detailed methods for non chemists" sticky thread. Or a newer version of the work done by Aurelius,i.e compilation threads  in which he collates links to the best examples of the various routes to whatever compound ,putting them all together in one threa

exactly.... but one which is "wasp verified" so to speak...ONLY those processes proven to work as advertised...none of this type of 'copy n paste' crap you can ALSO find at erowid/rhodium

dont get me wrong, the place is a often a wonderful resource but there is stuff like this one...where's it mention Na proplymercaptide? (even though 1-Propanethiol  = Na proplymercaptide)

its still quite confusing for the less well informed chemist

[quotehttp://www.erowid.org/archive/rhodium/chemistry/codeine2morphine.html


"Using Sodium Propylmercaptide5

A solution of 3.00 grams (10 mmol) of codeine in 60 ml of dry dimethylformamide was degassed under nitrogen by repeatedly stirring under vacuum, followed by inletting nitrogen. Following the addition of 3.00 grams (26.7 mmol) of potassium tert-butoxide, the degassing process was repeated, and 3.0 ml (32.7 mmol) of n-propanethiol was injected by syringe. The mixture was stirred at 125°C under nitrogen for 45 min (similar results at 110°C for 3h), cooled, and quenched with 3.0 ml of acetic acid. The solvent was removed under high vacuum, and the residue dissolved in 30 ml of 1N hydrochloric acid. The acid solution was washed with several portions of ether, treated with 5ml of 20% sodium bisulfite, and alkalized to pH 9 with ammonium hydroxide. The precipitated solid was collected, washed with water, and dried in vacuo (100°C) to leave 2.30g (80%) of morphine as tan crystals."
][/quote]

here's what is said in the original reference which came from someone here...and THATS ALL..hmmm?

Treatment of codeine with an excess of sodium propylmercaptide
in dimethylformamide solution at 125 "C
for 45 min afforded morphine in 80% yield.

anybody looked into this any further?  Anyone got these?...

  An Improved Method for O-Demethylation of Codeine
  J. A. Lawson and J. I. DeGraw*
  Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California 94025. Received May 17, 1976


it 'might' also be here...Journal of Heterocyclic ChemistryVolume 13, Issue 3, Article first published online: 24 MAR 2009 


but fresh has no access..and there's one more which I've requested in this months reference thread


but back to the question at hand, yes some extract from all these places the stuff thats works 'at home', and not the ones which have clearly been done under proper/professional lab conditions
 I guess you could assume the folks who really want to 'play' will acquire some basic equipment, thats just one of the many things required but not so hard..
                 

thanx dmon