why not just ship with out nicotine in Campaigning; Originally Posted by Surf Monkey
Yes it does. "Ship" basically means "sell" in this context. In other words, you buy ...
-

Originally Posted by
Surf Monkey
Yes it does. "Ship" basically means "sell" in this context. In other words, you buy the
PV without any nicotine products attached. That does NOT mean that you can't buy nicotine liquid separately. There are plenty of outlets that only sell the liquid. Johnson Creek for example. The idea here is to decouple the device from the drug. I'm not sure why some people are having a hard time grasping the concept.
Johnson Creek sells swamp water that turns green and kills atomizers, and is way overpriced. I wouldn't use their juice if it was free and delivered to my front door. Their problems were supposedly dealt with, but I've heard recent reports that their juice is still terrible. And I see you changed your point now that you reread his OP and saw that he suggested selling 0mg carts.
-

Originally Posted by
Babachoo
Johnson Creek sells swamp water that turns green and kills atomizers, and is way overpriced. I wouldn't use their juice if it was free and delivered to my front door. Their problems were supposedly dealt with, but I've heard recent reports that their juice is still terrible. And I see you changed your point now that you reread his
OP and saw that he suggested selling 0mg carts.
Which in no way addresses my central point, since I was just using Johnson Creek as an example.
"When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him." Jonathan Swift
-
Folks!
Don't get so snippy with each other! Face it, you all are your only allies in the world of e-cigs - this divisive stuff is bad news.
I think, unfortunately, as other people have already stated that the batt, atomizer and cart, regardless of nicotine have already been perceived in a certain context by the folks, agencies and organizations that have issues with non-Big-Pharmacy nicotine. As a result, it's moot to try and figure out too late how to separate the issue of nicotine from the issue of the device.
It's sort of like calling 'em PV's rather than e-cigs - too little, too late.
I'm thinking we need to approach the argument as one of "whatever you want to call them - they don't seem to pose a health or comfort risk to anyone NOT using them".
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
Bookmarks