Edit the Description for the Pharma Forum

Looks like we’ve come full circle here. See my first post:

Now look here:

Either one of those work for you? I think we are aligned, no?

Readalot you seem to treat this forum like a pack of cigarettes or can of beer that needs a warning label.

2 Likes

BuellerBuellerBueller

I have no idea how this thread is still going on. I must’ve been too vague yesterday.

There is no reason to change the description, so it will not be changed.

3 Likes

If this post in response to the reply I sent you this morning or just a general observation before reading that reply? If the former, that tells me what I need to know.

I provided constructive feedback this morning

You don’t think this modification would improve the factual description of the Pharma forum and send the appropriate message?

I’ve laid out the reason in the goriest of detail.

Absolutely, 100%. Recreational use of AAS should be thought of health wise very similar to cigarettes. Not quite the same since there is a (+)ve with AAS (muscle mass, bone health, performance) but the -(ve) side could be classified very easily with cigarettes.

I think @unreal24278 made this comparison (I’m not going to find the link) and it’s a good one.

Which would have been equal to about 60% of my graduating class in high school.

Good to know but so what?

150 years ago the US didn’t have municipal sewer systems.

It’s in response to the fact that, honestly, I figured the first two sentences in my first post here would’ve been a thread-ender and case-closer:

“I get what you’re saying, but I believe you’re reading too much into the specific wording. The message still comes across clearly without a more technically accurate change in word choice.”

Your 15+ posts following it only emphasized that you’re reading way to much into the word choice. We will not be idiot-proofing the description to differentiate between safe, safe-ish, safer, relatively safe, or whatever other variation.

The mental energy that’s been wasted on this topic is amazing.

Thanks, this response tells me what I needed to know. We fundamentally disagree on this important topic and you have the Admin rights. So that’s that.

I don’t think it’s wasted energy. The trail is here for the perceptive and thoughtful individuals to read. The right thing to do and the easy thing to do aren’t usually the same.

I quite enjoy being a member of small groups and hope this exchange can help someone. Clearly T Nation hasn’t idiot proofed the Pharma forum description, and your insistence on using the word “safe” in the Pharma description only serves to feed the cognitive dissonance but mostly denial of the many posters on that forum.

It’s hard to accept the truth sometimes. But that’s always the first step.

Have a good day.

Cigarette smokers have a lower incidence of Parkinson’s disease

May also have a positive effect in those suffering from ulcerative colitis.

Start smoking! It’s good for you! (Sarcasm)

1 Like

Just something to consider even though it’s probably common knowledge:

I realized after getting lots of great ideas shot down in the work place that an idea can be correct in principle, but not necessarily good.

What makes an idea good?

  1. It makes money

  2. It saves labor.

So what you’ve effectively done was ask the moderators to do something that may be right in principle, but not in action, because it creates work and doesn’t make any money.

It’s easy to lose track of the fact that although this is the place we brainstorm, recreate, socialize, etc. It is the mods workplace.

Edit:

But if you do have any ideas that save labor and make money, let me know, cuz I’m broke. And a bit lazy. :rofl:

1 Like

I hear getting involved with grand larceny can be quite profitable

1 Like

Yeah, delete 3 words and add two. Tons of work.

I get what you are saying though.

Besides 1 and 2 you listed above, I’ll add number 3. It needs to be their idea and you’ve got to put in the work to make it their idea.

1 Like

Too baroque.

I’m just a regular guy, not some super-villian.
I prefer my larceny to be less ornate, somewhat understated.

1 Like

For all your indignation about being snubbed, this is what you’ve made 19 posts, some of which are novella-esque in length, about.

Not only is it silly to think your change would ever make a difference in a newcomer’s mind, but the biggest problem with the pharma forum isn’t the new guys, it’s the people filing out “advice”.

My company recently had a meeting where 5 minutes were dedicated to describing why we are adding an ampersand between the first letters of our logo and the “co” at the end. I wish the mods here worked at my company so I could get that 5 minutes back.

1 Like

Fact.

I disagree. I think that’s more of an issue in the TRT section. There are a few folks (one in particular I have in mind) that really shouldn’t been giving “advice”.

If you examine the Pharma forum in the last couple years, there’s some really good advice being dispensed for those folks who are dead set on using AAS.

So my take is the biggest problems with the Pharma forum are

(1) guys coming to the Pharma using AAS (or dead set on using AAS) that don’t want to listen to the decent harm reduction / AAS cessation advice from the knowledgeable posters there.

(2) see number (1).

The continuation thread can be found here:

It didn’t stay open long and there’s some unanswered questions for the reader to consider:

@Chris_Colucci has accused me of backpedaling on the definition of safe (course I haven’t):

Good luck Everyone and remember this little chart when dealing with black boxes (which AAS are at the individual level):

@Chris_Colucci , I can assure you my intent was good and it’s unfortunate you keep casting me as either a moron, insane, or subversive to your forum. I appreciate T Nation and you making it available.

I made a suggestion, a very reasonable suggestion to improve the forum. You are the one hiding behind semantics in order to maintain the word choice used in the Pharma forum description. Most persons experienced with AAS would agree that using the word safe is not the best choice and “harm reduction”, “safer”, all the other suggestions are better and a responsible way to treat the subject of recreational AAS use. It’s not 1992 and we didn’t just get a copy of Duchaine’s USH II. That’s not the only reference we have at our disposal. We’ve learned alot since then. You’ve shared your opinion and I’ll share mine: You are being stubborn and borderline irresponsible. You know there’s a better word choice but you insist on providing support to the illusion that there’s a free lunch with AAS use. There isn’t. It’s really simple.

And before some of you cast me as Anti-AAS, I state it again. I fully support your right to use AAS. My suggestion before using them is to go in informed. Reader: I’m not attacking you or your AAS-using lifestyle.

Now I’ve got to get back to debating what to do with all that righteous AAS in my fridge. Bye.

I thought I was being pretty clear in the other thread when I said: “If this is really the hill you want to die on, keep going. Or realize that you made a suggestion, I said no, and that’s the end of it.”

And yet, you chose to stay on the hill.

We’re done here.

2 Likes

Topic Closed - Merged with The Stupid Thread.

2 Likes