Drug talk on Modified

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 04 May 2005 17:27

Hmm, I like the idea of at least experimenting with a unmoderated forum that only registered members could view. I can't see how we could restrict it by age and I think that's another issue - personally I think that if an issue is ok for a 18 year old to talk about - it's ok for a 17 year old. I may be concerned if an 8 year old started talking about it (and there is at least one person I know on the forum that young) but it really depends.

Most of all I'm confused by the "metaphor" Dan used. I didn't understand it at all. I really don't know how to comment on this diplomatically. I just think the nature of the people on the forum is entirely relevant to this issue.

peanutbuterboy · Post by **peanutbuterboy** » 04 May 2005 18:46

I have found many of the drug topics helpful. As in what not to do. Younger kids may read this and be like...I dont want to be like them, drugs are bad m'Kay. Then they will not do drugs, and that is good in the long run.

They also gives good information. You cant just call your parents and be like "Yo mom. Teach me how to roll a J." This may be the best information out there, and it is coming from people that know what they are talking about from expirence.

I think that drug topics should not be censored, but there should not be more than 1 at any given time. If there was one sticky topic entitled "Drugs" that may work too.

Nothing on this forum should be censored at all unless it is nasty shit I dont want to read or see in the first place.

If you dont want to read the Drug topic...dont.

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 04 May 2005 19:45

That sig is awesome! The Lorax is phat for everyone

I don't think they should be censored, because this is reality. I don't want to see a completely different image of someone on the net than when in person. That said-this is the truth. I don't want to be in some half hidden community. Drug subjects appear everywhere and should be addressed as they would be in person. Presenting two different images is just bad-especially when on the net. I chill on a Women's Sexuality board & topics of drugs show up every now and then-one went on for more than a dozen pages. Despite the increase in pleasantness, would you do the same to religious/abortion/music/which shoes are good for footbag threads?
Well...the last is understandable. Maybe a shoes thread should be made sticky?

qphox · Post by **qphox** » 04 May 2005 19:51

I actually do think that there's more drugs in footbag than in other sports. Weed is everywhere when I go to jams and competitions. There's nothing to enforce otherwise (as there is in other sports) so there's no negative reprecussions. Win win, in their mind.

That said, I myself have never felt obligated to smoke at all. Perhaps it's because I've got pretty good self-esteem, and I know that people won't think less of me if I don't join in. In Missoula, I was in a room with 8 guys.

7 of them smoked. I didn't. I wasn't alienated at all. In fact, Ben commended me for not giving in to peer pressure.

Make your own choices.

mc · Post by mc » 04 May 2005 20:17

i had thought of all that when I made my post, Dan. They're all good points.

However, sometimes you gotta draw a big, fat, crooked black line right through the grey area. I feel that, although in-depth political discussions can be as inflammatory and offensive to some as drug discussions, they are generally much more intelligent and important to our global condition, and therefor much more intrinsically justifiable, than the controversial posts people are making about drugs and their drug experiences.

I really agree with the following point.

"Locking threads is tantamount to saying "We want to maintain a false idea about the footbag community so that certain people wont be offended". "

Well. Yeah. I'd say that. That's definitely the case. I would rather soften the blow of our blatant, flagrant drug use as a sub-culture to the sensitive general public, especially if it means some kid's oversensitive parents might keep him or her from footbag because if it. Politics are different. Drug use is much more intrinsically offensive to parents and people of all walks of life than a particular political view.

as for who cares if it's irresponsible to talk about heroin on our forums,

me.

as for fournier's poetry, no one's going to be kept from playing footbag over that, or any of the other fun, non-footbag stuff we discuss in this forum or that.

I believe that the other mods and I are interested in interfering as little as possible. It's not that we want only footbag-related topics discussed here (of course) because our lives as footbag players are more diverse than that. but it's also important to observe some common sense when we're considering how we represent ourselves.

I still don't think drug discussions should happen on modified.

ps. I started this reply quite a few hours ago, before most of this discussion happened, then finished it just now.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 04 May 2005 21:15

However, sometimes you gotta draw a big, fat, crooked black line right through the grey area. I feel that, although in-depth political discussions can be as inflammatory and offensive to some as drug discussions, they are generally much more intelligent and important to our global condition, and therefor much more intrinsically justifiable, than the controversial posts people are making about drugs and their drug experiences.

Sometimes... Well maybe. But definetly not in this case. And definetly not from above. A big fat line should be drawn by the poster, not the moderator. And how can you claim that political discussions are more intelligent than drug discussions? The last couple political discussions we've had have been the most unintelligent threads ever discussed over modified. Someone mentioned the two most recent drug threads on modified, the ganja and morning glory one (one of which you locked). Now if you look at both of these threads, you see willing, intelligent people discussing different negative and positive effects of drugs. In fact, in the ganja thread, someone even entered a very long post about why marijuana wasn't good, from the eyes of a former addict himself.

Well. Yeah. I'd say that. That's definitely the case. I would rather soften the blow of our blatant, flagrant drug use as a sub-culture to the sensitive general public, especially if it means some kid's oversensitive parents might keep him or her from footbag because if it. Politics are different. Drug use is much more intrinsically offensive to parents and people of all walks of life than a particular political view.

I can sum up what you said here in much more consise prose: "I am willing to sacrifice and water-down Footbag in order to make it more noticeable to the general public." This is reminiscient of what big Corporations did to Skateboarding, Punk music, and martial-arts. We shouldn't be willing to give up what it is that makes Footbag special in order to achieve popularity for the sport.

Now, don't confuse what I'm saying with "Drugs are a part of Footbag and makes it more fun." This isn't what I'm trying to convey at all. I'm saying that Footbag is special and is generally a sport that accepts everyone, regardless of a lot of other things that would keep people out of different sports. By censoring, and make no mistake about it that is what's happening right now, certain topics, we are saying "We want popularity instead of honesty". Now I haven't played this sport for very long, but I would argue that this is not what most people want out of Footbag, and it sure as hell isn't what I want to see Footbag turn into.

as for who cares if it's irresponsible to talk about heroin on our forums,

me.

A moderator should not have the right to impose his view of
"responsibility" on other users. Had a newbie to Footbag been at a competition with you, would you still smoke? Say someone offered a hit of a joint to him, and he turned it down, would you take that as a hint that he frowned upon marijuana, and would you then tell everyone to stop smoking and talking about marijuana, whether or not the kid was around, for the rest of the jam? Say the kid expressed to you that he did not like everyone smoking and talking about weed, would you then have the right to silence everyone in the name of hoping (And I say hoping, because I really don't think drugs have a damned thing to do with keeping Footbag underground) you could get this kid interested in Footbag? Of course not, it is the anonimity of a internet forum that allows you to brazenly censor what a smaller percent of modified users choose to talk about.

as for fournier's poetry, no one's going to be kept from playing footbag over that, or any of the other fun, non-footbag stuff we discuss in this forum or that.

Lets be honest, a lot of modified users think modified pulls a lot of weight in the Footbag community. I don't think this is very true. Remember when people got sick of DLO and tried to switch it to whatever their name for it was? It fizzled out in about a day or two. Censoring modified users posts strictly isn't going to keep anyone, and I repeat, anyone from playing Footbag. Does it have the potential to stop someone from playing? Sure it does. Anything anyone has ever said on here has the potential to turn someone off to Footbag. But we all need to come down from our high horse and take a step back and say, our censoring decisions as a internet forum mean relitively nothing to the general Footbag community. It's no surprise Vasek didn't want to make a video for any of us, we're the critics of Footbag.

I believe that the other mods and I are interested in interfering as little as possible. It's not that we want only footbag-related topics discussed here (of course) because our lives as footbag players are more diverse than that. but it's also important to observe some common sense when we're considering how we represent ourselves.

Common sense should be reserved to the individual. Unban Damon Matthews.

I still don't think drug discussions should happen on modified.

Alright, now lets start e-mailing the IFPA telling them to enforce a rule that any discussion of drugs during a Footbag tournament will result in your IFPA membership being revoked.

slightly edited with permission to disclude a personal detail

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 04 May 2005 21:38

And another thing in regards to Fourniers poetry, he talks about some stuff in his first poem that I think a lot of people would frown up.

Am I being picky? Yes very much so, but now you know how I feel about this whole issue.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 04 May 2005 21:42

BainbridgeShred wrote:Common sense should be reserved to the individual. Unban Damon Matthews.

This is ridiculous. Damon chose to be banned. He decided it was the best decision as it stopped him from visiting the forum - he can email Bradmin at anytime and be allowed back on the forum. Both Bradmin and myself have explained this in the past. Please understand this. It is very simple and I'm sure you can if you try!!!!!!

Again the key point here, which you don't seem to be addressing - is legality. By all means discuss if the laws are correct or not - but in a democracy laws represent what is thought by society to be acceptable or not. If this were not true than the democracy would be invalid and hopefully people would do something about it - ie revolt. Logically this means that society in general - not footbag communities, not the hippy commune I grew up on, but the whole of society in most of the countries represented on this forum, believe that taking recreational drugs or encouraging and promoting their use is wrong. I don't think it's really an issue about how individuals feel about that. I support the legalisation of drugs. But as a community we can't make decisions based on what we believe - we need to make the decisions for the community. You say this yourself -

A moderator should not have the right to impose his view of
"responsibility" on other users.

That's what's trying to happen here. Obviously moderators are a part of the community and should be allowed to express their own opinions freely. I know I do - often!

If we were just going to make the decision - we would have, but we thought it was much better to see what the general thoughts of the community were. That's why this forum exists:

Bradmin wrote: So what image do we as a community wish to present?

This was the first post in the topic remember?

If things clearly went in one direction or the other - I'm sure we would follow them. At this stage it's hard to say. I'm not in favour of locking topics, but it looks like the other mods are and it looks like the community seems to be fairly split. I would say it's likely that discussion of drugs such as the topics that are currently locked will not be tolerated - but really it's all still being disscussed.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 04 May 2005 21:57

This is ridiculous. Damon chose to be banned. He decided it was the best decision as it stopped him from visiting the forum - he can email Bradmin at anytime and be allowed back on the forum. Both Bradmin and myself have explained this in the past. Please understand this. It is very simple and I'm sure you can if you try!!!!!!

Alright, I didn't realize that was the case. But please, try not to come off as pretentious as you did in the last line of that post, it gets this discussion no where.

Again the key point here, which you don't seem to be addressing - is legality.

Fine, lets talk legality. It is not illegal to talk about smoking pot. It is not illegal to talk about having smoked pot, If this were the case, rappers and politicians would fill up our jails. It is legal for someone to post on this forum saying "I am going to go light a joint. Later guys". Thus legality has nothing to do with this argument, Jeremy.

But as a community we can't make decisions based on what we believe - we need to make the decisions for the community.

We can't make decisions based on what we believe? "We" need to make decisions for the community? This sounds very Totalitarianistic.

This was the first post in the topic remember?

Why would I not "remember"? I have been doing more than anyone so far to express what I thought we as a community should present.

You come off as very haughty to me in this post. I don't know what this stems from, possibly because I'm not as good at you at Footbag, or because your older than me, or because you're conceited. If anything, this makes me want to shy away from Footbag much more than any topic about weed ever has.

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 04 May 2005 21:58

See, I don't have a problem with discussing Marijuana on modified. I've defended it in the past to people who have pm'ed me saying Modified is becoming a drug forum. That was when there were 3 topics at once about Weed and they were all at the top of "The Kicking Circle". I didn't like that there were 3 topics at once, but I consider Weed to be more harmless than Alcohol on any given day, and if not for it's illegality it wouldn't be portrayed so negatively in the News Media.

I do however, have a problem with people coming on Modifed suggesting drugs to use. It's one thing to discuss drugs as a political/legal topic, but it's a whole other thing to suggest the usage of drugs and discuss how much people can by them for.

delakong wrote:I was just wondering if anybody else here has tried morning glory seeds. If you haven't it's one of the greatest trips ever, well after you get past the nausea (sp?) and tiredness at the very begining. You think you're peaking but you keep going up and up. It's great!

Just thought I'd let y'all know since it's growing season again and you can buy them at any store that sells flower seeds. Heavenly Blue and I don't remember the other are the only ones that contain LSA (the hallucinagen [sp?] that makes you trip). You can do some chemistry and extract the LSA but I'm not that patient. Go to Erowid for more info.

For a pack of around 50 it's around a dollar, but you have to eat like 500. Sounds like alot but they're pretty small. Ten bucks for one of the greatest, longest lasting trips is pretty cheep to me.

If you're gonna extract the LSA it's probably more. Check it out on erowid.com for the way to do the extraction.

I don't care if they are legal or not. This is not the place to suggest to people (especially minors) that they can dig around in their flower garden and eat whatever they find. While we're at it why not suggest making a mix of chemicals under the kitchen sink and seeing if it'll get everyone high.
I don't want to turn on the news to find out that some kid went out and tried Morning Glory Seeds, puked in his friends car, slept in a gutter, then decided it would be fun to fly off a rooftop. Oh and guess what...he got the idea to try them from www.modified.com, a website dedicated to hacky sack known for it's image of Stoner Hippies.
You think it's so far off. Think again. This shit happens every single day.

AND...

BainbridgeShred wrote: You come off as very haughty to me in this post. I don't know what this stems from, possibly because I'm not as good at you at Footbag, or because your older than me, or because you're conceited. If anything, this makes me want to shy away from Footbag much more than any topic about weed ever has.

Talk about getting this discussion nowhere. I'd strongly suggest losing the attitude. You're own insecurities about your game and inability to argue your points successfully are no reason to start cutting on Jeremy. You want to cut down his arguments...fine! Do it without resorting to personal attacks.

And Jeremy. Don't antagonize people into personal attacks. I'm sure Dan is very intelligent and you needn't joke about his ability to understand what happened with Damon.

Moxie · Post by **Moxie** » 04 May 2005 22:10

I don't have a problem with marijuana specifically. I do have a problem with hard drugs like heroine, coke, crack, etc. It's your deal if you do them, but it doesn't need to be talked about on Modified.
______________
Emily Kulczyk

"Enemies are so stimulating." --Katharine Hepburn

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 04 May 2005 22:17

Sorry, I was a little frustrated because it seems like I've posted the same thing about Damon a number of times now.

I do think it's a question of legality because as I explained - legality represents what society thinks as acceptable. I'm pretty sure that if society thought it was acceptable to encourage other people to take recreational drugs then they would ban recreational drugs. It may be legal to talk about drugs, but it doesn't make it socially acceptable.

Dan quoted this from me:

But as a community we can't make decisions based on what we believe - we need to make the decisions for the community.

I think the key words here are "As a community" when I say that we need to make decisions for the community - what I mean is that the community needs to make decisions for the community. I'm not talking about "we" the moderators, I'm talking about "we" the community - ie all of us who check this forum. I'm saying that rather than making a decision based on if you think drugs should be legalised or not - make a decision based what you think would be best for the modified community in the context of the society we currently live in.

Again I'm sorry for patronising you - I regret being like that - I'll try to give more thought to my posts in the future.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 04 May 2005 22:18

Don't act like it was the only thing I said in my post. I made a post and responded to all his points that I thought I needed to respond to, and then I commented on the fact that he had replied to my points in a manner that I wouldn't have responded to his in. And then, after you tell me I am getting this discussion no where by "resorting to personal attacks", you tell me that I not only, "can't argue my points sucsesfully" but that I have "insecurities about" my game? Don't have the nerve to tell to "lose the attitude" without first looking at whatever attitude you also might possess.

I only mentioned the fact that Jeremy was better than me at Footbag in the first place because it seems that better members on this forum have much more say in arguments involving footbag or not, and can also get away with saying things that other members would not. This is only proven by these last couple of posts.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 04 May 2005 22:25

I wish I could still edit posts so I didn't have to make 10 posts in one day on a thread that moves so fast like this one. Either way:

I do think it's a question of legality because as I explained - legality represents what society thinks as acceptable. I'm pretty sure that if society thought it was acceptable to encourage other people to take recreational drugs then they would ban recreational drugs. It may be legal to talk about drugs, but it doesn't make it socially acceptable.

You used the word acceptable three times in this post, and the word legality once. I think this shows that this issue is not one about legality, but one about acceptability. Illegal implies something you can be punished my the law for. Unacceptable, of course, does not. This stems from the fact that unacceptable means many different things to many different people, whereas laws are set in stone. Thus some of you might find it unacceptable to talk about shooting up heroine, but it certainly is not illegal, despite whether the actual act is illegal or not. Thus, laws do show, to a certain extent, what is acceptable or not, but as stated above acceptable is subjective and ones particuliar definition of acceptability should not be censored, no matter how offensive it is to others.

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 04 May 2005 22:28

BainbridgeShred wrote:Don't act like it was the only thing I said in my post. I made a post and responded to all his points that I thought I needed to respond to, and then I commented on the fact that he had replied to my points in a manner that I wouldn't have responded to his in. And then, after you tell me I am getting this discussion no where by "resorting to personal attacks", you tell me that I not only, "can't argue my points sucsesfully" but that I have "insecurities about" my game? Don't have the nerve to tell to "lose the attitude" without first looking at whatever attitude you also might possess.

Okay look. I don't want this turning into a flame war. I apologize for my comments. Jeremy did as well. All that's left is you and we can get back on topic.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 04 May 2005 22:48

Okay look. I don't want this turning into a flame war. I apologize for my comments. Jeremy did as well. All that's left is you and we can get back on topic.

Without saving my machoistic face by pretending to apologize for the greater good, I hope you can forgive me for any posts I made in which I came off excessively harsh. That is particuliarly to you Henry Greise.

I don't think that's true at all. I hardly ever see Jorden, Felix, Honza, Lon or Peter posting in the non footbag forums - maybe that's why they're so good...

Well, these guys don't post here very often anyways.

professor · Post by **professor** » 04 May 2005 22:56

professor wrote:
I know some people who have quit footbag, most likely because of the drug issue; I was hesitant to join a club because of it.

newf wrote:
Aren't you glad you did? Don't those who quit look silly to you now? Do these people know that there are LOADS of stoners that go to their high school? You should probably let them know, they might want to quit that too. (Ok, that was stupid)

BainbridgeShred wrote:
I find it very hard to believe that anyone quit footbag because of drugs, and it seems you do too with the "most likely" sidenote. And why would you be hesitant to join club because of drugs, afraid you'd bail on a PS Whirl and fall on a needle? C'mon, if you don't want to do drugs, don't do them, no one will care. You should have enough confidence to know you have the restraint not to shoot up during a session. The only reason I can conjure up that you wouldn't want to join a club because of drugs is because you could possibly have the false impression of drug users as being bad people, and you can thank Ronald Reagan for that impression.

I didn't say people who did drugs were bad people, I said I didn't want to be around drug usage. There are many reasons for that.
1. If the people around me are doing drugs and are caught by law inforcement, they will consider me just as guilty even though I was not doing the drugs.
2. Any sort of drugs impares judgement and I don't feel comfortable being around someone who would be willing to do something they wouldn't do when they are sober.
3. Smoking drugs creates...well smoke. I don't really want to be around that. For personal and medical reasons.

So I harbor no ill will towards people who do drugs, I don't think it is right, but people can do what they want. I was hesitant to join my club for the reasons above, but I expressed my concerns to them and no drugs have been done around me since, and I appreciate that very much. Everyone I've talked to in the footbag community has been really cool and I don't think any of them are bad people. I'm sorry if that is the way it sounded.

Now to the original topic.
The fact is, whether you believe drugs are wrong or not, they are illegal in most all countries. So I don't think it is right to be discussing illegal things on a sports forum. Now I don't know if we should censor people who decide to discuss illegal things. On one hand I don't think it is appropriate, but on the other hand I think people can discuss what they want on the general footbag and discussion sections.[/quote]

ShredOnLawn · Post by **ShredOnLawn** » 04 May 2005 23:18

STONER HIPPIES PLAY FOOTBAG in the USA

FOOTBAG PROFESSIONALS PLAY AROUND THE WORLD

I disagree with Brad that Marijuana is not as bad as Alcohol.

Any Drug can be devastating to human life as a footbag player.

I'd like to see all the DRUG TOPICS REPLACED WITH YOGA TOPICS.

I told my family about this site. Please don't talk about any drugs at all.

ALL UNRELATED TOPICS ARE POINTLESS HERE.

Everyone should be using this site to become a better player and person.
(NOT TO LEARN ABOUT DRUGS)
If you WANT TO LEARN ABOUT DRUGS? GO TO DRUGS.COM

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 04 May 2005 23:28

A couple of points.

This is a footbag forum.
That said, it is also a place for people to come hangout and chat with friends about issues that are important to them.
There is a specific section dedicated to footbag topics and a specific section dedicated to non-footbag related topics.
I think it's fine to discuss topics that are illegal in that the political social debate of those topics should be discussed. If people wanted to have a discussion on why certain drugs should or should not be legal, I would not have a problem with that discussion. Personally speaking, I don't want to see discussions on drugs turn into "recreational usage topics". Go ahead and relate it to just about any other topic that would cause similar problems.
Is it right to post on modified the best way to steal a car?
How about the most precise way to stake out a house and rob it?
I don't think so.

Jackbag · Post by **Jackbag** » 05 May 2005 07:38

Splint wrote: I do however, have a problem with people coming on Modifed suggesting drugs to use. It's one thing to discuss drugs as a political/legal topic, but it's a whole other thing to suggest the usage of drugs and discuss how much people can by them for.

I definitely have enough faith that when a drug topic is posted, the Mods will get together and discuss whether or not it is acceptable ( on a topic by topic or post by post basis). I think not locking the topics, but sending the authors a PM is a fine way to deal with it. This does not seem like a drastic form a censorship to me. I am happy to see this discussion is taking place.

*A