manhattan & GQ drug threads

99% of threads bitching about moderator actions are ludicrous. This one is not.

Now I know I’m going to get the ever-lovin’ shit flamed out of me for this, but I don’t give a fuck. I know that there are people who will stick up for manhattan, not because he’s right, but simply because he’s manhattan. I hate these people. IMHO, they don’t belong on a message board dedicated to fighting ignorance. They belong over at the Pizza Parlor or some other godawful message board where stupidity reigns supreme.

I have never had much of a problem with manhattan on other issues. Usually his judgement is fair and sound. The threads are moved where they’re supposed to be moved, and the bad threads are closed. Great job, manhattan - except, of course, for one little subject…

It is well known around this board that manhattan doesn’t like drug threads in GQ. IIRC, his reason for this was that they often denigrate into flame wars and debates.

Fair enough. If it turns into a debate, move it to GD. If it turns into a flame war, move it to the pit. That’s your job around here, isn’t it, manhattan? You used to be pretty good at this. You moved the bad drug threads, and usually left the ones that were genuine GQs stay. I understand that questions about drug manufacture or where to procure drugs are on legally shaky ground. To protect the Chicago Reader, these should be closed.

Lately, though, it seems that any question about any aspect of drug use is grounds for immediate closing. Interesting questions about the effects of drugs that could be of invaluable use to someone planning to take a drug are nixed without thought or regret. All this does is make drug use more dangerous. It makes the users ill-informed and more likely to do something stupid.

In this thread, Alias asks what a beer bong is. An innocuous question, right? It’s not like he asked how to make methamphetamines in his basement. He had a genuine General Question. The thread had NOT turned into a flame war. It had NOT turned into a debate. Manhattan couldn’t let that go. He had to jump in and say:

:rolleyes: There was nothing wrong with this thread and you know it, manhattan. Despite what you think, a drug question is not a deliberate attack on you. It is a request for information, like any other GQ. Why do you have to respond with an “I’m going to take my ball and go home” answer?

There are plenty of other hot button issues that often turn into debates when a GQ thread is posted about them. They simply get moved to their appropriate forum. Problem solved. I guess drugs are somehow different. :frowning:

In another thread, friedo asks what a bong is. Apparently this question is so incredibly inflammatory that it needs to be shut down before the authorities see it. :rolleyes:

In that thread, JillGat said:

Perhaps. Virtually every question in GQ could be answered in some other place. Does that mean they should?

The problem with looking another place for drug info is that everyone has their own opinion on the issue and facts tend to get distorted or even made up. Pro-drug sites lie. Anti-drug sites lie. We know that if someone makes a bullshit assertion about drugs in a GQ thread, a more knowledgeable individual (hell, even a doctor!) will be along shortly to blow them out of the water.

So should we find another message board and ask the drug questions there? Yeah, right. Last time I checked, the vast majority of users on most other message boards aren’t even familiar with the Shift key. How can I expect them to give me accurate information?

In the first thread I linked to, Jomo Mojo said:

So just because manhattan has “issues,” the voices of hundreds of drug users on this board have to be stifled? Fuck that. Get over it, manhattan. If you can’t handle the drug threads, just ignore them and let another moderator keep an eye on them. How fucking difficult is that?

I am very interested in all aspects of illegal drugs - their use, abuse, effects, drug culture, etc, etc. It saddens me to no end to see the free expression of accurate drug information quashed like this.

Pretending things don’t exist doesn’t make them go away, manhattan…

Darn it, you’re right! I suppose the advice to go to a street corner drug dealer to ask questions about drug abuse and paraphenalia is something like telling people who might have questions about sex to go ask a prostitute or pimp. Kindly forgive my rant.

I read and post to the GQ questions about drugs because in some cases I know the answer (or think I do), or I am trying to learn something.

I often end up talking to people’s children. They occasionally really need to talk to an adult that is not a parent, and who won’t lie or exaggerate to them about the difficult subjects. Drugs are definately one of those subjects.

This message board is dedicated to fighting ignorance. I can think of only a few other subject that are so thoroughly misunderstood than your average street drug. The best possible way to help anyone deal with this stuff is information, freely shared.

Manny, please reconsider your stance on this. General Questions is not just a place for high-brow questions, it is a place for real-life questions too.

While not feeling the ire neutron star feels, I do agree with him. I certainly understand the Reader’s legal concerns, but information that you can find in the semi-annual “drugs are taking over the world” edition of Time magazine is certainly not going to cause the Reader liability. In the thread neutron linked to, the paraphenalia discussed are legal to sell, buy and own - in the case of a beer bong, you don’t even have to pretend you aren’t using it for its intended purpose.

We’ve had this discussion before in the Pit, and I thought the end result was some pretty clear rules. To paraphrase:

  1. Discussion about the effects of illegal drugs is fine - again, Time magazine information;
  2. Discussion of the drug culture in the U.S. is fine;
  3. Advocacy of the legalization of drugs is fine - a legitimate political viewpoint; but
  4. Advocacy of the illegal use of drugs is not fine; and
  5. Information intended to aid someone in finding, making, acquiring, or using drugs is not fine.

These guidelines would seem to make everyone happy. People get to talk about an inescapable fact of life, and the Reader cannot be accused of allowing the furtherance of criminal acts on its boards. Has something changed?

After re-reading the linked thread, I noticed that a link had been provided to the Cannibas Information Network. Was this the problem, Manny? the CIB certainly provides information intended to aid someone in finding, etc., pot. If we add
“6. - Links to sites that provide information intended to aid someone, etc. is not fine”
would that solve the problem?


Dear worthless cunt-sore:

You are a liar and an idiot. Let’s examine, shall we?

You remember wrong, as a search would have informed you. You are an idiot. I don’t like drug threads in GQ because they so often lead some idiot to post information on how to commit a crime, a violation of our user agreement.

This is a lie, pure and simple. Judging from the reactions so far in this thread, it is a lie which makes me look pretty bad in the eyes of my fellow members. You will prove this charge or retract it. That is not a request. I’ll give you a hint. Find a thread that I closed or edited which did not contain instructions or a link to instructions on how to commit a crime. Oh, and good luck. I don’t recall ever doing any such thing, you lying drug addict.

Another lie. Did you not read the next post? Dickhead ** jmullaney** posted a direct link to instructions on how to manufacture a piece of drug paraphernalia which is illegal in many United States jurisdictions, including mine. Not a beer bong. A marijuana bong. He, listen carefully now, violated our user agreement. Accordingly, I insist that you also prove or retract this lie.

Because I’m tired of slogging through these boards just to see the same thing happen again and again. I’m burnt out by assholes like you. You are the follicle on a pubic hair imbedded in pre-come mixed into a shit-stain on the underwear of life. And since the board does not perform well enough for me to do my job and edit and/or close threads during the day, I’m turning the gig over to someone better equipped to check the boards at night, when there are enough server resources to deal with drug-addled losers like you and give the other ~99% of our membership the customer experience they deserve.

Wow, a lie and idiocy all mixed up in one point. Jill has stated that she closed the thread in part because it had devolved into a pissing match. I’ll type this very slowly so that you can follow along:
Description. Of. How. A. Bong. Works. = O.K.
Description. Of. How. To. Make. A. bong. = Bad.

How can you trust any accurate information on any subject at all, since you yourself are a liar?

I’m particularly incensed and outraged by this charge. I give thousands of dollars a year to free-speech organizations. My defense of free speech cost me a college scholarship and some valuable friends. You will not get away with this.
Unless you provide a link, in your very next post on this board, to a drug-related thread where I edited a post or closed a thread for a reason other than violation of our user agreement, I insist that TubaDiva terminate your registration for this outrageous lie.

Calm, Manny, ca-a-a-a-alm… a Jedi feels no anger… not everyone flips a lid everytime a GQ thread is closed. Ca-a-a-a-alm…

And it’s “pre-cum”, not “pre-come”.

neutron sequence in the thread you cited was :

OP asks about beer bong and gravity bong.

first reply answers the factual question of what is a beer bong, answers the second, with a factual description of what a gravity bong is (neither of which is a problem) THEN links a cite providing instsructions on how to make a gravity bong - as in how to do something illegal in the jurisdiction of the Chicago reader.

Then manhattan posts.

As I read it, the list that** Sua** provided clearly would make the link a bad one (#5, seems to me). Now, as for the decision to delete the link, close the thread, move the thread - that’s all within his province. The error was made by the poster. It was clearly not in the ‘ok’ territory. what’s the problem now?

To play devil’s advocate, I got the distinct impression that the “bong” questions were posted solely to aggravate the mod(s). manhattan took a leave of absence over this, for chrissakes.

Manny, since you’re here, care to address the issue of threatening to ban Dani Filth, as I wrote in the Chronos-bashing thread? (I’d C&P the links and quotes but the board is moving waaaaaaayyyyyyyy slow this evening…)

Actually, SPOOFE, the spelling “cum” is an abomination. It’s right up there with “nite” or “kwik”. The correct spelling is “come”.

I’m not sucking up- I don’t need to

I can really see Manhattan’s point on this one. How many times do you see someone smoking tobacco out of a Bong? eh?-Come one…
just be a little more cool-headed, and don’t post any links that you wouldn’t want a nun to see, think we can all handle that?
as coming from a very drug-educated city in Central MN, I know a LOT about drugs, that I didn’t gain from first-hand experiance. including, but not limited to, how an inside-out glass pipe is made, a bong works, how a hooka works, how a water-bong works, and even how to make your own make-shift water-bong, pipe, and anything needed to smoke marijuana. so, in a way, I feel that this needs to be adressed to young adults so they DON’T find out first-hand.

Well, that got misproven… next?

I wasn’t aware the mods were required to justify their every action to us.

The closing of a beer bong thread on an internet message board “saddens you to no end”? Please.

[Edited by Alphagene on 03-28-2001 at 10:20 PM]

IMHO, while Manny’s reaction was harsh, it was within his perview since the post with the link was out of bounds. Unfortunately, ignorance abounds, and there are new (to drug related threads) posters all the time who don’t know the rules. Must be frustrating.

Just had to add that there is a thriving flavored tobacco market that often uses hookahs/bongs. In fact, I used one for the first time (strawberry flavor) at a middle eastern restaurant in alphabet city last weekend. Very smooth. Also, while I’ve never used the different bongs, I have been curious how they work. I’ve seen some pretty creative constructions before.

I consider myself to be a neutral observer in this thread; in fact, I’m generally a little biased in favor of the mods whenever one of these tiffs erupts. But am I the only one who finds manhattan’s threatening to ban neutron star over his OP just a tad bit…disquieting? Excessive, even?

I generally think the moderators here do a bang-up job for the most part, but it’s not hard to see where certain parties might take a negative view of them and the power they wield, especially in light of statements like this.

Is lying (or providing mistaken information) about the mods a bannable offense now? If I said UncleBeer closed one of my threads because he has a personal vendetta against me, will I be forced to apologize under threat of banning? Sheesh.

I don’t think manhattan was wrong to close the thread when it got into legally shakey area. I personally do not like the tone he often takes when closing threads, as it often seems like he’s getting one last flame in before the thread is closed, but that’s not really wrong, he should be able to speak his mind just like anyone else, whether or not he can get people banned. But I have seen instances where moderators demand retractions, apologies, or explanations under threat of banning, and I do not think that’s cool.

My .02 . . .

I read neutrons OP and thought he had a point.
Then I read manhattens response and realized he had a very good point.
This seems to me to be a case of one person not having all of the facts and the other one overreacting.
I am specifically disturbed by the following :

Perhaps there is a history here that I do not know about. Yet I thought that the Pit was the appropriate forum to vent percieved mod injustices, be them right or wrong. Why would you give such a harsh threat for that ?

I’m going to side with the frightened here. Manhattan, I understand how god damn insulting it is to have someone state things so horrendously offensive as assumedly-obvious fact, but why terminate him? Neuron wasn’t trying to be a dick; he was genuinely concerned, no matter how unfounded his reasons may have been. Verbally destroy him, but i don’t think Neuron deserves an out and out termination.


Not every action, of course not. Just the ones that don’t make sense or seem out of line. And even then they’re not “required” in any sense. But if they wanna avoid Pit threads like this one, they might wanna back up their actions or at least be consistent about it.

Threatening to ban someone should not be taken lightly; use it too much, and it will lose its effect. Or people will just assume you’re an ass, and complain about it.


Holy shit! Take some fucking valium, manhattan. And no, by saying that, I’m not advocating that you illegaly take a prescription drug.

I hadn’t noticed the link jmullaney posted. I’m sorry about that. Honest mistake. However, bongs are perfectly legal almost everywhere. Do you enforce every local law in your jurisdiction on the board members? If you lived in MiddleOfNowhere, Texas, in a dry county, would you shut down alcohol questions?

In the other thread, I didn’t know that you had some sort of history with people asking you bong questions, and I still don’t know that Alias did that deliberately to piss you off. I did, however, think that the use of the word “fuck” was frowned upon in GQ. Guess I was wrong.

Also, that little thing in the user agreement… Oh, what was it? Don’t be a jerk? Yeah, that was it! You think maybe you violated that rule just a little in your hate-filled response to me, manhattan? It has been said many times, by Ed and others, that, even in the pit, there is a line between flaming, and, well… being a jerk. If your post didn’t cross that line, I really like to know what would.

Oh, and in response to NothingMan’s question:

Nope. None. As far as I know I have never pissed manhattan off until now. I never posted a link that got me reprimanded. I never gave instructions on how to commit a crime. I made one little post and had my head chopped off and handed to me on a platter by a lunatic.

Because he’s a sad, petty, little, hate-infested man. I kind of feel sorry for him. Hell, now that I think about it, he really wasn’t even worth the time I took to write this post.

And ya know what? I can convey my opinion on this matter without having to say “cunt-sore,” “pubic hair,” OR “shit- stain.” I was never really one for name calling. Always seemed so 4th grade to me.

Fuck it. I’m just a drug-addled loser who only posts in the middle of the night. No, that’s not because I’m up all night taking drugs, as you automatically assume. I get off from my full time job between midnight and 3 AM, and get online then (or don’t if I’m too tired). I then get up and go to school (full time) at either 8 or 9 AM, depending what day it is. But I’m just a lazy pothead, right? :rolleyes:

That’s very admirable and I applaud you for it. However, I think the money would be better spend on some quality psychotherapy. Or maybe you should just save it for all the special medicines you’re going to need. That coronary can’t be too far off…