[GEN] Drug policy

Just a quick question.

I assume discussion of illicit substances is okay, but are users allowed to say they use them?

 

From the TOS:

User agrees not to post material that ... encourages conduct constituting a criminal offense.

If you want to discuss drug use or policy, the Senate is the appropriate forum. Discussion that encourages the use of drugs (either by the user or by anyone else) is not allowed (however, saying that you have used drugs in a discussion on use or policy is allowable, depending on the context). Posting while under the influence of drugs (or claiming to be doing so) is also against the rules.

These same rules apply to alcohol use, although they are a bit more relaxed in that case.

Kimball Kinnison

 

So, saying you use drugs is okay.

How about underage users saying they drink?

 

So, saying you use drugs is okay.

Read what I wrote again. It can be ok, depending on the context.

How about underage users saying they drink?

That would be inappropriate, as a general rule, but again could be appropriate as a part of a larger conversation. If they are encouraging illegal behavior (such as underage drinking), then it is definitely not appropriate.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Is encouraging people to go somewhere it's legal and use drugs okay?

Like, if I were to say that when I was in Canberra I smoked pot, and it was an interesting experience, so I'd encourage those who are curious to find some place it's legal and experiment if they're curious?

 

How about when the medical benefits of an illegal substance are so significant that it warrants its use, but obviously at the same time commits a crime ?

 

Like, if I were to say that when I was in Canberra I smoked pot, and it was an interesting experience, so I'd encourage those who are curious to find some place it's legal and experiment if they're curious?

Some places have laws that would even cover their citizens while in a foreign country (such as laws against bribery). As a general rule, the answer is that it would not be allowed. Exceptions would be made by the mods on a case-by-case basis.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Intersting - I didn't know that.

 

What if simply saying you use pot does encourage it, because User X might think, 'well, if User G uses it, why shouldn't i?'

 

How about when the medical benefits of an illegal substance are so significant that it warrants its use, but obviously at the same time commits a crime ?

A discussion like that should be directed to the Senate, where as long as you do not encourage that people break the law it should be fine.

Kimball Kinnison

 

where as long as you do not encourage that people break the law

That would be my point - I would encourage its use where there are no other medications that have significant effects.

 

it takes just a little to fall off the edge and get slapped with a ban...... if you push your luck, you may find your luck has run out. read the old threads about it. well, if they were deleted you can't, but if they're just locked....

 

I'm addicted to coke

 

The poster below this has enough crack in their pants to buy a small nation.

 

how did you know? [face_shocked]

 

The current policy is fine, the last thing Tfn wants is to open the door to a bunch of pot heads.

 

the last thing Tfn wants is to open the door to a bunch of pot heads.

Surely TFn wants as many users as possible, just as long as they obey the TOS. You can't say that people who frequently use pot can't join because of a personal choice they make (which may be legal in their country).

 

But on underage.... see, in the USA it's 21... in almost everywhere else it's 18 or 16 for drinking without a guardian and you can drink younger than that if you are with a guardian present.

So... that brings up an interesting issue.

 

So... that brings up an interesting issue.

Not really, just like marijuana's legal in some places, so those people can discuss using it since they did so legally, underage simply means underage according to the local laws.

 

Oh man, this is just opening a can of worms.

So thirteen year olds from Spain can talk about drinking wine, but thirteen year olds from New Jersey can't.

This reminds me of that old policy AOL had years ago regarding language allowed in their chatrooms. The one that sticks out in my memory is you could only gay people could use a word that starts with "f" and rhymes with bag. How they planned on enforcing that, I don't know...

 

you can say fag here I'm pretty sure it's in the TOS.

 

you can say fag here I'm pretty sure it's in the TOS.

Depends on context. If you're using fag as a synonym for gay, then it's not allowed. Also, the use of the word gay as a synonym for bad is not allowed. And if we see people abusing the words, using them for the sake of using them, we?ll crack down on that even if they?re technically being used in what is technically the proper context.

 

I thought a "fag" was a cigarette?

 

Yes, a fag is slang for cigarette. But it's also a derogatory term for a homosexual. If someone says they are smoking a fag, it should probably be assumed that the user is referring to a cigarette, not a homosexual (although context may play a part). But if one user says another is acting like a fag, chances are they don;t mean they mean teh user is acting like a small white cylinder of smooth, rich tobacco that causes cancer.

 

So I can call someone a fag, as long as I am referring to the fact he is a skinny white guy resembling a cigarette. And I can call someone a homo, as long as I am suggesting he is a member of the Genus and Species of Homo-Sapien-Sapien. Can we call people we know to be born out of wedlock bastards? Or is that completely out of the question?