It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ATS's lack of backbone in regards to the cannabis issue.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:10 AM

originally posted by: Jakal26
So, because "the establishment" deems it to have "no medical value" it is regarded by ATS as having "no medical value" that the stance? (I'm honestly just asking...really don't care either way. Not being an ass, just wanting clarification)

Don't throw rocks about not reading, if you're not going to read yourself. In the link I posted, in the opening post: "4) Conspiracies surrounding the war on drugs in the United States and the legalization of marijuana and its medically-proven benefits."

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:11 AM
a reply to: KnightLight

It just boils down to not advocating personal recreational use at this point. That might change also, but for now, that just about the only limitation.
edit on 7-4-2015 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:12 AM
a reply to: AnuTyr

Do you realize what forum you are in?
This is the RANT forum. I didn't know one needed to have much of a "point" to RANT here? That's apparently new to me.

Again, you still haven't read the OP and I know it when you say things like...

Do an ATS search on medical cannabis benifits and there is still plenty of threads alive and not shut down.

The truth of the matter is that all the damned studies in the world can be posted...but many of them are contradict each other. "Cannabis cures this"....."cannabis causes ones brain to die"......etc etc etc...

It is PERSONAL EXPERIENCES that others relate is what they learn from. It's what shifts their thought processes. That's a fact.
The inability to tell others what it has done for "us" (trying not to be too personal about it here) besides "get us high" is a suppression of knowledge that is medicinally useful and can save people suffering and save lives. Again, that's a FACT. It's evident by the PLETHORA of people saying, "hey, cannabis saved this family member and that one"...."cannabis healed this wound or reduced the painful effects of that cancer"............the studies can be biased, and so can people, sure.....but like I said, I (and many others) often trust the experiences of other people (especially collective experiences, which is what one can glean information from if you "data mine" comments from various places) FAR MORE than we trust studies done by those with something to gain/lose from certain results.

...but I don't know why I bother. You didn't read the OP and still think I'm on about "legalization" or "general drug use" like I have no clue.
I'm around a lot....I'm very familiar with policy here regarding those things....

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:24 AM
a reply to: Jakal26

I never said you didn't have no clue. i am simply saying to go look those forums up. And you will find the * Personal Experience* you are asking for.

It has to be within reason of course. As this is a touchy subject and you are playing with fire. But i support what you are saying and i did read your post.

But as i stated, No one can OP * Hi im dave, i smoked a rolled green one for my back pain. Should i try Strain A or Strain B?

I don't understand what you are asking jackle as in, what you are requesting is already possible within ATS under the right circumstances.

You would know this if you scanned those medical forums. Including this one, that people have commented on personal use to cure illnesses. Not on the General use of the Drug ect. Its still sketchy grounds on T and C both me and you are dancing around it even mentioning it like we are here. Expecially with the example i gave. I shouldn't have to post examples like this as many people have had their posts hidden or even banned for it....

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:29 AM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: KnightLight

It just boils down to not advocating personal recreational use at this point. That might change also, but for now, that just about the only limitation.

Jackle26...... ^ This. This right here.

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:29 AM
I would think, after reading the T&C, that whoever wrote it enjoys the benefit of cannabis on a regular basis.
edit on 4/7/2015 by Ensinger23 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 01:50 AM
ATS have stepped up when it comes to the war on drugs, imo. Its awesome to see how attitudes a changing in America to this miracle medical plant. Seriously though, you want a real conspiracy? Unlike alien abductions or whatever other awesomely interesting topics this place discusses. The conspiracy against cannabis as a medical plant can actually be proven without a doubt. First it was simply a way for the paper industry to ban hemp and control Mexicans, then a way to bring down the hippy movement of the 1960's and then simply just a way to control poor people.

America just needs to hurry up and get it legalized federally, that's all I'm saying! They are after all the ones who forced the rest of the world to keep it illegal all these years. So they are the only ones who can now prove to the rest of the world that full legalization works.

Either that, or I just need to find a genuine American chick to hook up with that's from Colorado or Cali, marry her and hook up citizenship. So sick of this hickville backwards country I'm living in anyway. Seriously, every girl wants themselves some blonde white trash, with one of them hick Aussie accents, whether they deny it or not! So where are all those American girls at?

Its going to be a good 10 to 20 years before Australia even considers legalization, as backwards that we are. I got medical needs here! Caused by the feeble mindedness of society in general, it drives me crazy and there's only one cure.

lol, there's a rant for you all anyway, it is after all the rant section, right? lol.

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 02:00 AM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: KnightLight

It just boils down to not advocating personal recreational use at this point. That might change also, but for now, that just about the only limitation.

Right I get it.. I'm limited in many areas I want to talk about though.. And I guess it could be looked at as an advocation, and I know not everyone on here is as old as I am. I don't want to do that.. But things involving the mind and health.. It's hard to say anything.


Still not saying anything.

Can I say I don't do anything?? Cause I don't..

edit on 7-4-2015 by KnightLight because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 02:22 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 03:25 AM
Generally I find discussion on ATS about cannabis is one sided, immature and those who profess its genius are blind to the other sides of the argument.

I've done a lot in my private life for promoting cannabis as a medical aid but never on here, never with the views of teens on this site who get high and talk nonsense.

I completely agree with the decision of the T&Cs.
edit on 7-4-2015 by and14263 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 03:41 AM
a reply to: and14263

Yeah I agree with you. It's the internet as usual. People like to be all or nothing and won't compromise or dilute their views.

Too many seem to have just one note. Cannabis is a panacea for everything! Cannabis causes mental illness! Either/or.

Anecdotally, I've known young people who've lost their personality and become nasty through too much skunk. Then I've known middle-aged women who've overcome bad knees, sore backs and whatever through quiet, daily spliffs. I've seen paranoia and I know people who've smoked weed for decades who are perfectly fine.

It doesn't do me any good so I stopped 10 years ago.

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 04:46 AM
I am quite surprised to see this rant regarding ATS policy on cannabis discussion. When I joined ATS T&C's prohibited any discussion of it at all. Hell, if you fell in love with a girl named Mary-Jane you couldn't even post about it!

It was literally zero tolerance and as ultimately we are all guests in Skeptic Overlords house, good manners mean that we abide by how he runs his house. I was happy to do so.

As the medical cannabis debate began to make changes in both law and attitudes in the US many of us 'THC enthusiasts' watched with great interest (and a bag of Doritos) as inch by inch the huge boulder of decriminalization gradually was inched away from the cave mouth and light filtered in.

I may be wrong, but I see this as a crucial and delicate time in negotiations with ideas so ingrained in the minds of TPTB that subtlety is the best way at the moment. Don't spook the animal as it walks tentatively into range by blathering on about how delicious the last one was!

It is a tricky subject that affects the lives of millions of people primarily by its demonisation and there are a gazillion personal experiences that people have regarding this issue. As a long time user of 34 years I could fill threads with 'personal experiences but that's all they are, coloured by my own viewpoint and stance. But I do believe that recounting these experiences could act against the very thing that I want which is total legalization. I have no interest in hearing loads of 'personal experience stories' because I believe that they help the cause as much as how 'Jesus fixed my leg with his carpentry tools' stories help Christianity.

I think ATS have been very flexible regarding discussion of cannabis and I have had several discussions recently that would have been 404'd ajust a couple of years ago. I am grateful that the debate has opened up and only by being mature and patient can we change things, remember in most of the world (Thank you Mr Hearst) real jail time faces anyone in possession of this natural wonder, and these things can and will be used against us in a court of law. (I know only too well)

ATS reflects society in many ways and change comes slowly, By relaxing his stance on discussion in the first place SO has shown that writings in stone can be carved anew and that the site can evolve to meet a changing world. That alone makes me happy and I look forward to the day that I am no longer considered a criminal for committing no crime.

Baby steps OP.
Even the fact that you expected your rant to 'disappear' shows that open honest discussion is welcomed here if its done properly in an intelligent and civil manner.
And I know its not a huge topic compared to the myriad of subjects discussed on ATS, so thanks to SO for his relaxation of T&C's on this issue in the first place, which was a personal thing for him, he didn't have to make any concessions at all.

(post by mcChoodles removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 05:31 AM
We at ID have altered out TAC to not allow discussion of "illegal" drugs. That said we still do not tolerate discussion of illegal drugs and we dont really have a place for common discussion of legal recreational use. There are plenty of websites out there that cater to that genre'. We do allow discussions regarding law and governance as well as social impact type threads.

The times are a changin'.

But not so much that off topic discussions are accepted in areas better served elsewhere by more focused websites.

(post by mcChoodles removed for a manners violation)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 07:38 AM
Hey OP ATS might be a little slow .....but their still miles ahead of all the rest of these sites......The cream always rise's to the top.

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 07:45 AM
I don't know what your problem is. I post a pro-weed thread at least once a week on these forums. The only time they get shutdown is when members can't shut up about personal use.
edit on 7-4-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 07:58 AM
I find the whole thing just odd.... people have asked for years to be able to discuss this on ATS and yes, we now can.
But we lost soooo many good members to get to this point, so many great minds with interesting threads about the conspiracies surrounding drugs and so on.

I made a thread at the end of 2012 when some of the laws in the US started changing

Springer had this to say

A snippet here

It makes zero sense that we would greatly reduce the perceived credibility of the topics that the site was founded on, limit the potential reach of our member's thoughts and ideas by a significant margin, and alienate the single source of revenue that allows the site to continue, all for the benefit of one topic that has never, ever, generated anything of value at all.


I'm glad things have changed but the attitude and hostility to get to this point was just insane.

posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:08 AM
a reply to: blupblup

I can agree with you to a point, but allow me to explain from a one staffer's perspective.

The amount of work that we were taking on, in order to keep the drug topics alive at the time was ENORMOUS. I was reading nothing but those threads for days at a time and removing about 1/3 of all posts due to people not being able to follow simple rules that we had laid out.

It wasn't complicated originally, discuss the drug war, not your stoner stories. That didn't work out unfortunetely. And I'll be the first to tell you that I've been one of the more vocal members of staff behind the scene, pushing for the rule changes that came in 2014.

I've worked in the industry for many years, it's very dear to my heart, especially the cancer research aspect of it. It killed me not being to bring these things to the greatest minds I've found online. And when the walls came down, fantastic, we go exactly what we wanted and so far, it's been really good.

Yes, some threads end up looking like Swiss cheese because people are still talking about how cool it was to hit the bong, but overall the conversations have been very productive. Just take a gander at Krazysh0t's profile and there's a dozen MJ related threads in every possible arena of discussion.

There's quite a few in mine as well. But the point is, yes it was a long, hard fought battle but it's mostly over now.

The rules as is, IMO don't need to change. SO and Mark might determine that the personal usage clause can be removed at some point, but I would disagree, just because I don't see ATS as being the place to have those discussions.

Overall, I think what's been accomplished in just a few short years is fantastic and the acceptance of this topic on ATS, has sorta been in line with how things have worked out in the legislative aspect of it right?

So the more places start approving these ballot measures, the easier it will be to have these conversations, on ATS and anywhere else for that matter.


posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:17 AM
a reply to: tothetenthpower

And all of that could have been done originally and without the craziness and loss of members, heavy handed tactics and snide remarks.
Anyway I'm not getting into it, was merely posting my opinion.


top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in