next »

[Edgar]

well theres place for other topics, No for the one here

[AB_Celtic]

I'm pretty sure this thread is a prime example of why this topic isn't allowed. It leads to controversy.

Let's all calm down.

[guava_wrench]

So just a question, at what point of legalization will the staff consider Marijauna to be like Alcohol, which is still a drug but an allowable topic on the blog.

No idea.  Probably after it's no longer illegally federally, although even then I'm not sure we want a lot of stoner stories.

The first half makes sense, though medical marijuana is no longer classified with the drugs we wouldn't be able to talk about with laws like here in MA. Obviously, we can talk about aspirin, prescription drugs, and we have thread on beers.

The second half of the previous post is nothing more than being judgmental considering the beer threads. If a drug that you don't like is as accessible as beer, then you should probably stop the beer talk too if you want to be that prudish.

It is 100% the prerogative of the owner of the blog to define what content is appropriate. I suspect that person prefers rules that makes sense, and I find the rules to be quite reasonable and conducive to a good experience. As our political threads tend to show, we can have discussions on things we disagree with and people who can't handle it can stay out. "Free speech" is irrelevant. People can say what they want, but no one has the obligation to host our speech on their blog or on their forums.

[PaulPierce34G]

I think it's just a matter of many of these topics being sensitive to a lot of people. 

While I'm sure many of us are down for a good debate, these topics can sometimes lead to extremely heated arguments to the point where people just start bashing one another rather than sticking to or defending their debate/argument. 

I have my beliefs in various aspects of life and everyone else has theirs.  If someone agrees with me, that's great.  If not, then that's their choice.  I just leave it at that. 

[guava_wrench]

I think it's just a matter of many of these topics are sensitive to a lot of people. 

While I'm sure many of us are down for a good debate, these topics can sometimes lead to very, very heated arguments to the point where people just start bashing one another rather than sticking to their debate/argument. 

I have my beliefs in various aspects of life and everyone else has theirs.  If someone agrees with me, that's great.  If not, then that's their choice.  I just leave it at that.

I don't see how the topic of drugs is anywhere near as heated as discussions of politics. Tax talk leads to far more heated debate than talk of our recent ballot initiative in MA (which is great news!). I assume that banning drug talk makes sense because the blog doesn't want to be perceived as condoning breaking the law. Clearly the blog is okay with talking about mind altering substances since there is booze talk (though I haven't seen talk about alcohol abuse).

I assume by drugs we are talking about illegal drugs.

[PaulPierce34G]

I think it's just a matter of many of these topics are sensitive to a lot of people. 

While I'm sure many of us are down for a good debate, these topics can sometimes lead to very, very heated arguments to the point where people just start bashing one another rather than sticking to their debate/argument. 

I have my beliefs in various aspects of life and everyone else has theirs.  If someone agrees with me, that's great.  If not, then that's their choice.  I just leave it at that.

I don't see how the topic of drugs is anywhere near as heated as discussions of politics. Tax talk leads to far more heated debate than talk of our recent ballot initiative in MA (which is great news!). I assume that banning drug talk makes sense because the blog doesn't want to be perceived as condoning breaking the law. Clearly the blog is okay with talking about mind altering substances since there is booze talk (though I haven't seen talk about alcohol abuse).

I assume by drugs we are talking about illegal drugs.

As I said, everyone has their beliefs in regard to what they deem right or wrong...to each their own.

At the end of the day, this blog has rules that we have to follow whether we like them or not.  Just like when you go to various places (ie some restaurants) and there is jacket and tie rule.  I hate wearing ties sometimes, but you've got to do it if you are going to certain venues...rules need to be respected.   

[Roy H.]

So just a question, at what point of legalization will the staff consider Marijauna to be like Alcohol, which is still a drug but an allowable topic on the blog.

No idea.  Probably after it's no longer illegally federally, although even then I'm not sure we want a lot of stoner stories.

The first half makes sense, though medical marijuana is no longer classified with the drugs we wouldn't be able to talk about with laws like here in MA. Obviously, we can talk about aspirin, prescription drugs, and we have thread on beers.

The second half of the previous post is nothing more than being judgmental considering the beer threads. If a drug that you don't like is as accessible as beer, then you should probably stop the beer talk too if you want to be that prudish.

It is 100% the prerogative of the owner of the blog to define what content is appropriate. I suspect that person prefers rules that makes sense, and I find the rules to be quite reasonable and conducive to a good experience. As our political threads tend to show, we can have discussions on things we disagree with and people who can't handle it can stay out. "Free speech" is irrelevant. People can say what they want, but no one has the obligation to host our speech on their blog or on their forums.

No, from experience, the pot smokers have handled themselves with a lot less maturity than the beer drinkers on here.  People haven't been able to rationally discuss marijuana without a lot of "420" type posts.

It's not like the rule just sprang up out of nowhere; there's a history behind it, which has convinced us that the discussion is a lot more trouble than it's worth.  Whether that's because a topic repeatedly becomes extremely heated (like abortion) or immature (like legalization threads), both cause an excess of work for the staff, and are very little benefit to the blog.

[Chris]

Not to get too off topic, but is anyone else just tired of hearing about legalization anyways?  Regardless of the rules and all that, I am more than a little relieved to not have to hear about it here. 

[Kiorrik]

So just a question, at what point of legalization will the staff consider Marijauna to be like Alcohol, which is still a drug but an allowable topic on the blog.

No idea.  Probably after it's no longer illegally federally, although even then I'm not sure we want a lot of stoner stories.

The first half makes sense, though medical marijuana is no longer classified with the drugs we wouldn't be able to talk about with laws like here in MA. Obviously, we can talk about aspirin, prescription drugs, and we have thread on beers.

The second half of the previous post is nothing more than being judgmental considering the beer threads. If a drug that you don't like is as accessible as beer, then you should probably stop the beer talk too if you want to be that prudish.

It is 100% the prerogative of the owner of the blog to define what content is appropriate. I suspect that person prefers rules that makes sense, and I find the rules to be quite reasonable and conducive to a good experience. As our political threads tend to show, we can have discussions on things we disagree with and people who can't handle it can stay out. "Free speech" is irrelevant. People can say what they want, but no one has the obligation to host our speech on their blog or on their forums.

No, from experience, the pot smokers have handled themselves with a lot less maturity than the beer drinkers on here.  People haven't been able to rationally discuss marijuana without a lot of "420" type posts.

It's not like the rule just sprang up out of nowhere; there's a history behind it, which has convinced us that the discussion is a lot more trouble than it's worth.  Whether that's because a topic repeatedly becomes extremely heated (like abortion) or immature (like legalization threads), both cause an excess of work for the staff, and are very little benefit to the blog.

Don't know if Jeff agrees with this, but I'd like to think that -since we're running a family friendly site- it doesn't matter whether those drugs are legal or illegal.

What matters is that we don't want to talk about it on this board in much the same way you don't want to talk about your sexual escapades in front of children.

How does this relate with the alcohol argument? Simply personal preference. Jeff chose to condone the alcohol rants. I'm sure he'd rather not see them if he had the choice.

Bottom line; let's stick to Celtics, and anything else that we allow.

[JSD]

So just a question, at what point of legalization will the staff consider Marijauna to be like Alcohol, which is still a drug but an allowable topic on the blog.

No idea.  Probably after it's no longer illegally federally, although even then I'm not sure we want a lot of stoner stories.

The first half makes sense, though medical marijuana is no longer classified with the drugs we wouldn't be able to talk about with laws like here in MA. Obviously, we can talk about aspirin, prescription drugs, and we have thread on beers.

The second half of the previous post is nothing more than being judgmental considering the beer threads. If a drug that you don't like is as accessible as beer, then you should probably stop the beer talk too if you want to be that prudish.

It is 100% the prerogative of the owner of the blog to define what content is appropriate. I suspect that person prefers rules that makes sense, and I find the rules to be quite reasonable and conducive to a good experience. As our political threads tend to show, we can have discussions on things we disagree with and people who can't handle it can stay out. "Free speech" is irrelevant. People can say what they want, but no one has the obligation to host our speech on their blog or on their forums.

No, from experience, the pot smokers have handled themselves with a lot less maturity than the beer drinkers on here.  People haven't been able to rationally discuss marijuana without a lot of "420" type posts.

It's not like the rule just sprang up out of nowhere; there's a history behind it, which has convinced us that the discussion is a lot more trouble than it's worth.  Whether that's because a topic repeatedly becomes extremely heated (like abortion) or immature (like legalization threads), both cause an excess of work for the staff, and are very little benefit to the blog.

To be fair though, beer threads on here that would be classified as more mature are based on flavors and brands that have sprung up through industry.

[mgent]

Drugs are bad mmm k. Look no further than many of the trade threads on this site and you'll see what they can do to a person's mind.

[guava_wrench]

Are jokes about Michael Beasley and Josh Howard requesting trades to Denver off limits if nothing else is mentioned?

Figured I'd get that in there either way.

[guava_wrench]

So just a question, at what point of legalization will the staff consider Marijauna to be like Alcohol, which is still a drug but an allowable topic on the blog.

No idea.  Probably after it's no longer illegally federally, although even then I'm not sure we want a lot of stoner stories.

The first half makes sense, though medical marijuana is no longer classified with the drugs we wouldn't be able to talk about with laws like here in MA. Obviously, we can talk about aspirin, prescription drugs, and we have thread on beers.

The second half of the previous post is nothing more than being judgmental considering the beer threads. If a drug that you don't like is as accessible as beer, then you should probably stop the beer talk too if you want to be that prudish.

It is 100% the prerogative of the owner of the blog to define what content is appropriate. I suspect that person prefers rules that makes sense, and I find the rules to be quite reasonable and conducive to a good experience. As our political threads tend to show, we can have discussions on things we disagree with and people who can't handle it can stay out. "Free speech" is irrelevant. People can say what they want, but no one has the obligation to host our speech on their blog or on their forums.

No, from experience, the pot smokers have handled themselves with a lot less maturity than the beer drinkers on here.  People haven't been able to rationally discuss marijuana without a lot of "420" type posts.

It's not like the rule just sprang up out of nowhere; there's a history behind it, which has convinced us that the discussion is a lot more trouble than it's worth.  Whether that's because a topic repeatedly becomes extremely heated (like abortion) or immature (like legalization threads), both cause an excess of work for the staff, and are very little benefit to the blog.

To be fair though, beer threads on here that would be classified as more mature are based on flavors and brands that have sprung up through industry.

There are still the juvenile "I got wasted last week" posts that are a lot less mature than the legalization discussions, which are often quite reasonable -- thus the new Denver referendum success.

[blastoidesroidsnoids]

We get it, there are rules... its just that these ones are really non sensible, especially for such a large message board like this where just about everything else is allowed.

[Kiorrik]

We get it, there are rules... its just that these ones are really non sensible, especially for such a large message board like this where just about everything else is allowed.

FAMILY FRIENDLY.

Means your kids should be able to post here.

Makes perfect, perfect perfect sense to me.

Not rocket science.