What do you think about the "Post No Sources" Issu

nubee · Master Archiver

What do you think about the old "Post No Sources" Issue that was enforced at the-Hive ??

is it necessary, i mean what's the pro's and con's of allowing it to be done, i would lean more towards the side of letting people say whatever...

ApprenticeCook · DILLIGAF

Sources has different definitions...
If you say something like "Sodium bicarbonate is a common ingredient in household baking soda" thats fine... your not doing any damage to industry or potential access to anything...
However if you say "Sodium bicarbonate can be found in XYZ baking soda in a purple and green box at PGF supermarket" thats not ok, XYZ might get the hint and change something or PGF might remove XYZ products from the shelf if enough people around here start using it to get whatever ingredient for clandestine chemical purposes.

Of course i actually dont mean bicarb, but any chemical in place thereof.
So keep it general and we will all live ok. Just no brand names or store names.
Thats what i think anyway.

-AC

IndoleAmine · Dreamreader Deluxe

No sources. To protect bot the source itself and the discoverer of the source IMO (see AppCooks post!)

EDIT: of course its ok to give hints on where to find xyz; like I do all the time... Very Happy

thenewrunne · Chemically Balanced

Half the fun is searching for the chemicals! Rolling Eyes

I think comments such as "nitrogen gas cylinders are used in welding and other industries and can be found at your local welding shop." - are great, and that sort of help should be encouraged.

If you're smart enough to do chemistry, you're smart enough to find the chemicals.

malatesta · Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:21 am

Posting sources by proxy should not be allowed either. In which case the linking to off-site sources, such as in the "readily available chemicals" thread should be disallowed as well...wouldn't you agree IndoleAmine?

nyarlothotep · Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:42 am

And having issued warnings, they were ignored.
All sources of chemicals (read: Companies) Should NOT bee shared.
Ever.
Even indirectly.

It brought an end to the research chemical market thru overexposure to idiots, and it will allow for the watching and shutting down of hobbyist chemical sources if they are linked to drug manufacture directly.
Let people search.
And let the hobbyist chemist have his sources. DO NOT MENTION SOURCES.

Probable places to find a chemical....maybe. So long as all real name-brand/identifacatory charateristics are left out.
Vague is the name of the game....vague or not at all.

FlaAlchemist · Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:09 am

No Sources. Shocked

Uncle Sam will just try and restrict its use.
Example dexatrim (PPA), Mahaung, Sudafed,Various assorted essential oils.

nubee · Master Archiver

yes, maybe, but these things are ther for reasons not relating to clandestine use, and therefore will most likely stay there for that reason.

the research chemical company thing had nothing to do with posting sources, but rather a few od's, namely one in the military.

good word spreads by nature.

chemical suppliers and the like are allready linked to clandestine.

by the time that something gets to being restricted from "misuse" by uncle sam, its not due to the guy who posted about in that forum last night, its due to thousands , if not hundred's of thousands of people using it and getting something out of it.

in my opinion it's work is done maybe, and the publicity was worth it. everything has a limited potential/lifespan in an everchanging world.

methyl_ethyl · Riedel De Haen

If you're smart enough to do chemistry, you're smart enough to find the chemicals

That's right Runne, I wish more adopted your philosophy. Those that are fed by the silver spoon, end up drinking from a tin cup.

That being said, we will always have what we need, and we should not worry about how sources are drying up for everyone else because of the idiocracy that spreads like wild fire throughout internet message boards and the like.

survival of the fittest,

m_e

biobrew · Sat Apr 23, 2005 7:49 pm

I agree, you should have the chemical knowledge and intuition to AT LEAST LOOK AROUND AND READ LABELS.

I have a question regarding one of the main chemical suppliers. Say i was running a reaction and wanted to share my formal report, and in that report a company like fisher or sigma is quoted as having a product that i used @ 99% purity. Would this be OK? Or should we just avoid talking about OTC gems that we convince ourselves that uncle sam doesn't know about.

IndoleAmine · Dreamreader Deluxe

I think we can't hide the fact that every chemical is produced by a big, well-known company.

Also most likely, those well-known companies will not suffer if any bee gets busted and the pigs find well-branded chemicals at the site.

Its more about the orange store, the yellow-blue packaged methanol etc.etc. Wink

malatesta · Sun Apr 24, 2005 2:26 am

If you post specific chemical business locations, web addresses or whatever on a web board (either directly or by proxy ie by linking to another site) where you have also provided the information concerned with the manufacture of illegal substances you could be standing on very shakey legal ground IMHO. You could possibly even be seen as facilitating in a crime. I am not a lawyer....but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be the one to test it in a court of law. Sources and TSII were seperate entities for a reason.
THEY have unlimited funds and THEY have the totally willing complicity of the propaganda machine.

IndoleAmine · Dreamreader Deluxe

THEY won't dare attacking acros or merck in court.

And we don't encourage performing illegal syntheses - thats not legal, whether sources are posted along with or not.

Our site is strictly for information purposes, and mentioning that a certain chemical used in a certain synth is well-branded is just information.
(I can tell you that military routinely uses "lockheed-martin" equipment, without risking to affect any regulations on the sale of warfare equipment AFAIK Wink

)

The companies I mean don't sell to individuals either, you need a proper license to be able to aquire any chems from them. So in fact they are not considered "sources" of reagents for common people..

Maybe we can come to the compromise that as long as individuals are able to actually buy said items from said company, it is considered a source, and mustn't be shared publicly here?

malatesta · Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:22 am

methyl_ethyl · Riedel De Haen