I haven't seen a thread like that either, but IRL it's happening, the authorities know about it and personally I think it's going to be a problem and a huge hit to vapers. Another reason why I think we need to use our PVs publicly. Respectfully in every way of course, but publicly when possible. The more people the authorities see using PVs while doing absolutely nothing illegal is a good thing.
Am I the only one that has a problem with this?
- Thread starter sawlight
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I haven't seen a thread like that either, but IRL it's happening, the authorities know about it and personally I think it's going to be a problem and a huge hit to vapers. Another reason why I think we need to use our PVs publicly. Respectfully in every way of course, but publicly when possible. The more people the authorities see using PVs while doing absolutely nothing illegal is a good thing.
I have no problem with it being censored in the forum. I respect and understand the reasons why. But I don't see any issue with vendors selling the flavors either. It's silly, and I don't want to vape it, but it's just a flavor. If you are that bothered by it, don't give those vendors your money.
My biggest beef along those lines is the fact that the other stuff has become so popular that the cigar manufacturers now sell the wrap only. Who buys a grape flavored cigar wrap from 7-11 and actually fills it with tobacco? At least selling the wraps cuts down on the clumps of tobacco in the parking lot on Monday morning from gutting a tobacco filled cigar.
Pretty much anything can be turned into a device for that stuff. I will not give up the fight for vaping simply because our equipment can be used for it. I vape loud, proud and respectfully. And I will continue to do so until the day I die.
Let's not forget that vaping ** (which in many places is legal now) has the same harm-reduction implications as with tobacco... Its healthier not to smoke, across the board.
Raising a fuss about trendy e-liquid names is beside the point.
Raising a fuss about trendy e-liquid names is beside the point.
Last edited:
No ones hiding anything. The mods and the people who run these forums made the right decision. Im not a fan of censorship either but in this case it makes perfect sense.
Vapers gain NOTHING from being associated with illicit drug use no matter how sociably "acceptable" it may seem to some.
@ Sawlight I agree with you 100 percent.Its been my policy for awhile now not to patronize ANY juice supplier who sells flavors that appeal to the Bob Marley crowd.
What one does or does not do is basically inconsequential to this argument.
The forum does not allow it, so one does not do it. Simple.
It's like trying to smoke analogs in places that don't allow it. Duh. Don't.
The forum does not allow it, so one does not do it. Simple.
It's like trying to smoke analogs in places that don't allow it. Duh. Don't.
I have just a few things to add.
1. While I personally do not like censorship in general, that I feel only applies when one is speaking in public fora to and about (for or against) the government and its agencies. Censorship on ECF is not a First Amendment issue. It is a private property issue. The ECF is the private property of whom ever owns the forum. It is their decision as to whether or not certain speech is permitted or not permitted.
2. While I have a favorable opinion of "that particular substance", it is illegal. Even if it were legal, however, I would prefer that it not be discussed here. This is not the place for those types of things. There are other forums for that.
3. Given the unknown status of regulation at this time I feel it is paramount that vapers, who primarily vape to not smoke tobacco (that is to say quit, or reduce their cigarette/cigar/pipe habit), needs to be separated from those who would use APVs for "that other substance".
While the ANTZ can, and probably will, fabricate whatever "evidence" they want, any regulation before it is approved will have a public review. So the question comes down to when it comes to PV use are we talking about "persons belonging to a frowned upon subculture using something that is illegal" or are we talking about people who are using a device to not smoke tobacco. The general public, and hopefully the President and Congress, if they see what we are, truly are--people who vape because they don't want to smoke tobacco anymore--are likely to be more sympathetic to us than if we were lumped in with the "Bob Marley Crowd".
1. While I personally do not like censorship in general, that I feel only applies when one is speaking in public fora to and about (for or against) the government and its agencies. Censorship on ECF is not a First Amendment issue. It is a private property issue. The ECF is the private property of whom ever owns the forum. It is their decision as to whether or not certain speech is permitted or not permitted.
2. While I have a favorable opinion of "that particular substance", it is illegal. Even if it were legal, however, I would prefer that it not be discussed here. This is not the place for those types of things. There are other forums for that.
3. Given the unknown status of regulation at this time I feel it is paramount that vapers, who primarily vape to not smoke tobacco (that is to say quit, or reduce their cigarette/cigar/pipe habit), needs to be separated from those who would use APVs for "that other substance".
While the ANTZ can, and probably will, fabricate whatever "evidence" they want, any regulation before it is approved will have a public review. So the question comes down to when it comes to PV use are we talking about "persons belonging to a frowned upon subculture using something that is illegal" or are we talking about people who are using a device to not smoke tobacco. The general public, and hopefully the President and Congress, if they see what we are, truly are--people who vape because they don't want to smoke tobacco anymore--are likely to be more sympathetic to us than if we were lumped in with the "Bob Marley Crowd".
Last edited:
Even though I'm clean and sober, I'm still one of the "bob marley crowd" at heart...
I will respect the rules of this board, but have problems shunning "those *other* vapers".
It's only my $0.02
I will respect the rules of this board, but have problems shunning "those *other* vapers".
It's only my $0.02
This.
They pay the bills, play by the house rules. They don't have to care about your feelings. They're providing a service, free of charge.
ETA I can't believe this discussion is even occurring, really. It's just the same as showing courtesy and not smoking in your neighbor's house.
Last edited:
People used to think that modesty was a virtue, and discretion was a wise attribute. Now anarchy, nonconformity, blatant shock value and "do what thou will" are the motto's and banners that people fly over head. It's the times we live in.
You can hope to influence others but you can't expect to change them. Funny thing is, the most unsuccessful technique you could possibly deploy is to gripe about who they are and what they do. It is perceived as a snobby insult and that you are presenting yourself as better than them. It just isn't received in the same light as it is supposedly intended when given.
It goes away some when people truly mature, problem is some people never do.
You can hope to influence others but you can't expect to change them. Funny thing is, the most unsuccessful technique you could possibly deploy is to gripe about who they are and what they do. It is perceived as a snobby insult and that you are presenting yourself as better than them. It just isn't received in the same light as it is supposedly intended when given.
It goes away some when people truly mature, problem is some people never do.
Yes,& it is a plant for gods sake. That means anything can be proclaimed a controlled substance. Websters defines a drug as 'anything' that can affect the body. Under this def vit C can be controlled. I think one has to get a script for vitamins/herbs in the eu. Codex Alimentarius(Book of Food) is a global cartel designed to hand over the control of natural remedies to the pharmaceutical giants (hide your herbs,they are drugs). This has been proposed in the states. It is a treaty that our gov signed with the un. Orwelle,in his book stated 'the dictionary would be rewritten every year as the meaning of words were changed to fit the current (ever changing)paradigm. The proletariat is furthering the bourgeoisie agenda. The bourgeoisie speaks what they want spread, & the proletariat spreads it like a bunch of parrots.
There are many topics on here that discuss health concerns with vaping some that could give the ANTZ leads to follow to ultimately ban ecigs. One such thread is the stainless steel oxide discussion which talks about Chromium oxide possibly being inhaled. Also the silica wick discussion about silica threads entering our lungs. All of which is way more damaging than "Hey can I put this plant in my ecig?"
So should we stop talking about our health concerns also? No because I don't want to live in fear and the personal research we do serves the community.
I say let them say we're trying to use it for illegal substances. They have to prove it. Yes they can and will say anything. It shouldn't be our job to worry about what they might say. It's a waste of time. It's way more productive to make them prove it and provide a counter argument in terms of results we have found in the limited research that has been done. We have nothing to hide. And topics like this make it seem like we're guilty of something.
Is the talk of illegal substances in our ecigs annoying? Absolutely! Should it be talked about here? No. But only because it's against the rules. Not because big brother might be watching. At the end of the day it's a dead end.
Just for the record I'm a recovering addict and alcoholic and am in no way pro drug.
So should we stop talking about our health concerns also? No because I don't want to live in fear and the personal research we do serves the community.
I say let them say we're trying to use it for illegal substances. They have to prove it. Yes they can and will say anything. It shouldn't be our job to worry about what they might say. It's a waste of time. It's way more productive to make them prove it and provide a counter argument in terms of results we have found in the limited research that has been done. We have nothing to hide. And topics like this make it seem like we're guilty of something.
Is the talk of illegal substances in our ecigs annoying? Absolutely! Should it be talked about here? No. But only because it's against the rules. Not because big brother might be watching. At the end of the day it's a dead end.
Just for the record I'm a recovering addict and alcoholic and am in no way pro drug.
Thats called a dry drunk.Thats NOT being sober......sober is having clarity of mind, body and spirit unfettered by dependencies.
Maintaining a self-image thats skewed by those same dependencies is a sure way to find yourself addicted to them again.
Sobriety isnt dependent on time as much as it is on recognizing this and working to effect a change in every aspect of your life.
In short, if you view yourself as an alcoholic, or a smoker , or a drug addict then you'll always be one....just one who abstains and is most likely miserable in the process.
.
Last edited:
I've not understood the rule being in place because of the search engines. Every forum I belong to uses the #code# box in advanced mode to eliminate certain content in posts from searches. I don't get why its not used here instead of banning certain words. One of my first posts here, being diabetic, I mentioned a med I take and my post was removed and I was "reprimanded" by a mod. My med is not an illegal substance but, well, there ya go. In later posts even when I mentioned a diet drink I called it Coca Cola instead of what everyone in the real world calls it. On second thought, I guess it would be kinda ridiculous going advanced to code that brand name.
When youre short on manpower.....just stop to think how many posts this forum has per hour....much less per day. ...Its easier to enforce a zero tolerance policy then to separate things by differing "shades of gray" like weve become accustomed to in the U.S.
All those shades of gray lead to confusion, make more work for people and also sometimes cloud the real issues. I think this way is just easier and smarter for all involved.
All those shades of gray lead to confusion, make more work for people and also sometimes cloud the real issues. I think this way is just easier and smarter for all involved.
That is a perfect example of what the ANTZ would say about vapers (you are still smokers, you haven't truly quit...etc).
Let us examine this, for it is full of fallacies:
first, sober means "Not intoxicated or drunk". (dictionary.com). So, a person who is not using or under the influence of substances is sober... clarity of body.
Clarity of mind and spirit (especially spirit): these are completely subjective values, they have no fixed meaning, and in a statement like the one above they serve no purpose other than the attempted establishment of moral superiority by one party, over another party. This is number one in the zealot's playbook, for any cause. There is no way to prove anything with regards to these values, so it re-focuses attention away from real issues and onto a fight that can never actually be won. PRIMER could write a dissertation on the health of his mind and spirit, and we could dismiss it out-of-hand because he is obviously skewed and thus his opinion is inherently flawed, or lesser. He could become pope, but at heart he is still a DRUNK. This is exactly the kind of fight ANTZ want to draw us into.
Maintaining a skewed self-image: who determines what 'skewed' means? Or 'dependent' for that matter? Again, completely subjective value judgments. PRIMER simply said he used to use an intoxicant, and now does not; he never stated that he was addicted, or dependent. We have no idea what his self-image is. To the ANTZ, only the complete abstinence from inhalation of anything is worthwhile, and only those who meet that criterion are un-skewed in their self-image. Since the ANTZ will base this ideal self-image specifically around themselves and what they do or do not do, they automatically 'win'.
"Maintaining a self-image thats skewed by those same dependencies is a sure way to find yourself addicted to them again."
PRIMER is weak, and in danger, and he needs my protection, and if he does not agree with me and do what I desire he will suffer a negative consequence. All of his opinions stem from said negative behavior and can thus be dismissed immediately.
"Sobriety isnt dependent on time as much as it is on recognizing this and working to effect a change in every aspect of your life."
This is the most telling: sobriety actually doesn't have to do with a particular substance, but with the whole range of life choices: I define what sobriety means, and what views and choices must be made in EVERY ASPECT of your life. To the ANTZ it is a battle over worldview and morality, not vaping itself. I am superior, and I have the answers. You cannot defend yourself or your views because you are a skewed person, and cannot be trusted. You cannot argue. You cannot defend yourself. You cannot make any choice that I do not agree with.
Last edited:
I sure wish they'd take that approach and stop inhaling oxygen...
I was going to respond to some of the ridiculous statements made two posts above. In fact I started too several times,but then I realized that its pointless to argue with someone who isnt sober to begin with.
However, that certainly explains the pro-drugs comments made in several places throughout this thread.
This is the kind of liberal psycho-babble and nonsense thats causing this country to crumble right in front of our eyes.
The truth is there for anyone who can see it and my comments about being a dry drunk are widely supported by N.A, A.A and many other ten-step programs who make it a priority to help people get off addictive substances and behaviors.
Abstinence from a drug or addictive behavior is only half the battle.People can "quit" for months and even years but unless they change their way of thinking then the chances of a relapse are highly likely.
It's pretty well documented across several fields and I'm extremely surprised that someone would even attempt to argue otherwise, unless they were being defensive about their use of said substances, were mentally deficient or impaired or a combination of all three.
Personally I'm more apt to listen to an organization like AA than someone who's avatar makes it crystal clear where his preferences lie in this particular debate.
Sobriety - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
However, that certainly explains the pro-drugs comments made in several places throughout this thread.
This is the kind of liberal psycho-babble and nonsense thats causing this country to crumble right in front of our eyes.
The truth is there for anyone who can see it and my comments about being a dry drunk are widely supported by N.A, A.A and many other ten-step programs who make it a priority to help people get off addictive substances and behaviors.
Abstinence from a drug or addictive behavior is only half the battle.People can "quit" for months and even years but unless they change their way of thinking then the chances of a relapse are highly likely.
It's pretty well documented across several fields and I'm extremely surprised that someone would even attempt to argue otherwise, unless they were being defensive about their use of said substances, were mentally deficient or impaired or a combination of all three.
Personally I'm more apt to listen to an organization like AA than someone who's avatar makes it crystal clear where his preferences lie in this particular debate.
Sobriety - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited:
I think, in honesty this is mostly peoples curiosity that leads to "that question". In reality its quite impractical next to the alternatives and will never catch on.
I have plenty of experience with 12 steps programs. zapped showed he is clueless when he said this.
12 steppers know they are addicts for life.
12 steppers know they are addicts for life.
- Status
Similar threads
