Author Topic: naming sources....  (Read 11048 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

elfchemist

  • Guest
naming sources....
« on: July 19, 2001, 11:40:00 PM »
Swim was wondering were exactly does everybee draw the line at naming a source, here's what swim means;

Example 1
Is saying "get mini thins from wally world" naming a source? Yes it is, but due to the wide knowledge of this does that make it acceptable? Swim says yes on this one.

Example 2
Is telling the story that can be used to get the desired chemical/equipment naming a source. e.g. see this post for an example only, no one is pointing fingers here,

Post 191972 (missing)

(hookedonhydro: "approaching the cashier", Chemicals & Equipment)
.
By telling the story used the police know the industries that people approach to get their chemicals from, this is more relevant for solvent sources like toluene and ether and reducing agents (NaBH4, LAH). Swim thinks this contributes to sources evaporating away......

Example 3
Is naming websites where glassware can be obtained naming a source. These websites are in various search engine's databases anyway. So swim thinks that this is alright.

Example 4 an extension of example 3.....
Is saying that; sassafrass can be obtained by mail order over the net and to just search for essential oil dealers and hit them up for a few bottles each. While not relevant to swim, swim thinks that this doesn't help the established recreational chemist's cause.

Swim thinks that there is a grey area in naming sources and each case is individual. Just use your heads bees. Swim keeps any stories that it uses to itself other than PM's to selected bees, Swim doesn't think there is a "Hive code" to tell these things to everyone, if a bee does give you something like that in a PM count yourself lucky and don't abuse this knowledge. Every bee is going to have a subjective judgement on the 4 examples and any other source situation.
When looking for something research everything about it  and you will know where to look for it and what to say to get it, persistence pays off................

-eLF

ChemReack

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2001, 12:09:00 AM »
I totally agree with you. There is a very fine line to trot when talking sources. It could also quite possibly bee spoken in posts deceivingly(sp).


"I always tell the truth, even when I lie"
                                         Tony Montana

Rhodium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2001, 04:32:00 AM »
To say what stuff are available at nationwide chain stores I do not consider giving up sources (as that is easily found by visiting any such store), but don't say that in city X on street Y, there is an aromatherapy store that asks no questions when you order oils by the gallon.

Neither do I consider it prohibited to suggest somebody to search for "sassafras oil" on the net. What I think should be prohibited is "at www.diddledoo.com you can buy sassafras with a 91% safrole content", as well as naming online chem/labware suppliers.


https://www.rhodium.ws


zooligan

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2001, 04:59:00 AM »
What about saying something like "reagent blappity-blah is available from online stores supplying the blakety-blank hobby/business/industry"??  You're not specifically mentioning the site, but if there are only a handful of online stores supplying those hobbyists or businesspeople, then that source (or few sources) are pretty much burned, no?

z


"And if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, then we'll just be bogus too!"

Rhodium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2001, 05:06:00 AM »
I think it is pretty okay to say that RP can be had from pyrotechnics suppliers, and that PdCl2 can be had from hobby photography suppliers. As long as no source is named specifically (or to say that the source can be found by typing in "xxx yy zzzz" into google and to take the second hit from the top. That is also being too specific (imho).


https://www.rhodium.ws


Osmium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2001, 05:55:00 AM »
Sorry if I may sound a bit like an asshole, but why answer many of the questions at all. They often show the ignorance of the person asking for stuff, and that no research was done. Why would you give a stranger, a complete unknown person hints where to find stuff, when you have no idea what and who he/she is. Why help ignorant newbees cook a batch of honey so they can sell it for a big profit? I have no satisfaction in that, someone making big money with our knowledge. What we want is valuable members for this board, people who are willing to learn, research, contribute and show some commitment. Who will stand up on their own after they stumbled for the fifth time in a row, and still have the desire to fight this war with us. Not for selfish financial reasons, but because it is the right thing to do. Once people become true contributors, ask halfway intelligent questions and try their best to further our cause they will be known by their name and then they can ask such questions in PMs. I doubt I would pointt someone I don't really know to a good source, even if it was only for reagent grade NaCl. Once I get to know them, either via email, PM or on this board I'm more willing to share some helpful hints.

ChemReack

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2001, 06:34:00 AM »
I full heartedly agree with pm's amongt's the respected ones. But you could also look at it like this. The more idiot backyard scetchball wannabee chemist there are out there, the less the odds of the true chemist who covers his/her trail will ever be found. The cops will be to preoccupied catching kids popping up in mom and pops basements everywhere. Now please don't misconstrue my comments as being the ideal hobby for youngons. But we gotta face the facts that it can, will and is happening. Swim would rather see the cops follow a lead from a chem supply about a liscence plate from a young kid who bought rp then look in swims direction.
Does anyone kinda catch my drift. You need the bottom feeders so the fish up top can get big and juicy. Maybe I just have a fucked up way of looking at things.


"I always tell the truth, even when I lie"
                                         Tony Montana

reflux

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2001, 08:33:00 AM »
to win a war you have to get your views acepted by the majority. thats how prohabition was won. more people making honey more people using honey more aceptance of honey. more honey price goes down. ;)

Quicksilver

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2001, 09:24:00 AM »
The more idiot backyard scetchball wannabee chemist there are out there, the less the odds of the true chemist who covers his/her trail will ever be found.

Unless they shared sources.  Then Careful-chemist will fall under scrutiny once Bozo-bee is busted and the DEA investigates their vendor.
(better hope that Careful-chemist was reeeally careful)

ChemReack

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2001, 09:40:00 AM »

The more idiot backyard scetchball wannabee chemist there are out there, the less the odds of the true chemist who covers his/her trail will ever be found.



EXACTAMONDO DUDE



"I always tell the truth, even when I lie"
                                         Tony Montana

Semtexium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2001, 11:53:00 AM »
Actually in my opinion, the more idiot backyard scetchball wannabee chemist there are out there the more busts are made.  The more busts are made the more money the cops get to fight the war on the chemists.  The more money they get to fuck with the chemists the more likely it is that YOU will go down for what ever it is that your dreaming of.  PERiOD...


::)  ::)

Osmium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2001, 04:03:00 PM »
You are unethical. It's not nice to sacrifice teens for tis purpose, and ruin their lifes forever.
There is nothing to be gained from wannabees being busted left and right.

Unobtainium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2001, 04:33:00 PM »
In a rare moment of clarity, Osmium hit the nail on the head. If someone can't source their own shit without asking a complete stranger for help, then they need to find another hobby. And anyone who craves the praise they'll receive for offering up their sources to any newbee that asks for it is just fucking themself. Why do you even care if the dumbass at the IP address across the country can find a large quantity of methylamine?

More on topic, with the exception of brand names that have become generic descriptions due to their market dominance, brand names are a bad idea. Everyone knows Sudafed pills suck, and most people know that when someone says 'sudafed', what they really mean is any pill containing pseudoephedrine. It's like saying 'Kleenex' when you mean 'tissue', or 'Clorox' when you mean 'bleach'.

But the other named brands out there including the generic brands shouldn't be published because it just gives the dea something to focus their anger on. There happens to be a small grocery store chain that I know of that stocks a particularly friendly generic brand of pills that are virtually impossible to find anywhere else. This threat to national security has only been allowed to continue due to an oversight on the part of the DEA, and I'm sure as soon as it is brought to their attention they will attempt to correct it. The last thing I want to see when I log on the Hive is a thread drawing attention to that store and that brand of pills.

As far as chainstores, I don't care if you say you went to Wal-mart and picked up some Duracell batteries, because you can get Duracell batteries at every fucking store on the planet. Wallmart is generally not considered a "source", it's a convenience. A 'source' is a place that supplies difficult to aquire, borderline illegal products, with no questions asked and questionable payment a shipping policies. Those places should be protected like gold if you ever happen to find one. You wouldn't tell a complete stranger that you were out hiking the other day and found a deposit of unmined gold and then tell them where it was, so why give them a source for red phosphorus that has gone virtually unnoticed? When too many people tap a source, the source dries up.

Dispite the government's attempt to control every fucking thing on Earth, occassionally sources fall through the cracks because they either aren't in a prime location, or they are considered to small to worry about, or their was a typo that left them of the dea's computer. Whatever the reason, the minute a source is mentioned on the Hive, they become a priority target.

To reiterate, why do you care if anyone else can find shit? As long as you can find the things you need for yourself, that's all that really matters. Fuck everyone else.






Free Spitball.


Semtexium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2001, 06:12:00 PM »
I either wrote that wrong or you read that wrong, I'm saying it's a bad thing if YOU get busted, the "YOU" is there to get the point across.  I need to learn english AGAiN or amerikan or something...   :P


::)  ::)

noj

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2001, 07:03:00 PM »

Fuck everyone else


that doesn't at least make an effort first. Hell, swim came here with no science background other than psychology. Thanks to those willing to share ideas and their trials and tribulations on the hows and whys, swim was successful in his lucid dreams in 2 short months. Everything was acquired simply by using the fucking search engine. There really is no need to ask anyone where to get anything. What you need is already here. The rest should be up to you. If you can't get beyond that, then this line of dreaming is likely a risk to you, us, and the war itself.



Author unknown.

sawman55

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #15 on: July 22, 2001, 03:12:00 AM »
This is the age of information. Anyone, anywhere,anytime, the information should and will be spread to everyone. This is the future, like it or not!

Unobtainium

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #16 on: July 22, 2001, 05:56:00 PM »
Well that particular information is not going to be spread here. Like it or not. :P






Free Spitball.


ChemGrrl

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2001, 05:52:00 AM »
Naming a supplier (say the purely fictitious-LXY Glassware) using the rationale that it can be found using any search engine on the net does no good.  Such a thing only makes it easier for Uncle Feddie to stake out businesses and supoena their order records.  No matter how well you hide your true address, someone still has to recieve the package, and it really is just a matter of time before the trail will lead back to you.  Glassware is particularly relevant to this example, as it is easily broken and/or chipped and does need replacement at least occasionally.  In fact, I might worry more about a glass source than just about anything else except maybe a source for rp.

That said, yes there are sources for just about anything on the net.  Some are fronts, some support our cause.  The key is finding out which are which, and which are such big names that your order will get lost in the mountain of paperwork (like Wal-Mart.)  The only way to know for sure about a source is to become the source yourself.  Since this isn't practical...

Even those of us who are dilletantes at this, still should have enough respect for bees that are fighting the cause to not indiscriminately burn sources.  Just because you hang out to bs, doesn't mean that someday you won't want to at least buy someone's homemade product, and shooting them in the foot won't make that job any easier.

Think about the consequences of what you post regarding sources.  Please?

ChemGrrl

Six legs good, four legs food.  (pigs 4, sheep 4, bees 6)

zooligan

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2001, 06:20:00 AM »

Swim was wondering were exactly does everybee draw the line at naming a source, here's what swim means;




One other thing about sources, at least for me.  If I am involved with a private exchange of information, I only trade sources that I have found personally.  In other words, if another bee were to give me a source, I wouldn't pass it down the line and trade it for another, etc... 

Now, though, I rarely trade sources any more at all.

z


"And if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, then we'll just be bogus too!"

elfchemist

  • Guest
Re: naming sources....
« Reply #19 on: July 24, 2001, 06:01:00 PM »

Naming a supplier (say the purely fictitious-LXY Glassware) using the rationale that it can be found using any search engine on the net does no good.



Swim started this thread to have an open discussion on naming sources and the opinions voiced have been great. It seems in most cases it's best to just shut the fuck up bees!
-eLF