Collectively irrational? We have an almost 100% fail rate with the fly by night sources that set up shop here. I consider it irrational to give any "source" who doesn't have the cash to start up on a source board the benefit of the doubt... but your insolence and unfounded arrogance either belies stupidity or an ulterior motive.. and you seem fairly well spoken, so it must be in your financial interests to stick up for sources.
Yeah, this is sort of what I'm talking about.
You don't know anything about me, so rationally, you should only conclude things that you *can* know. If I were a source, the rational thing to do would be to say that you shouldn't order from me because you don't know enough good information -- which is fine. But you also wouldn't discredit me. You'd simply say "I don't know enough about you" and move on.
However, in no way would it follow that if I defend a source that I have a financial interest in that source. Note that I have never tried Pharmacom, ever, and probably won't unless I find a cheap domestic bulk deal, which isn't going to happen.
But something like this --
Me: The tone here sucks for [reasons].
You: If you're defending a source and arguing with people here (insolence/stupidity) you must have an ulterior motive, and it must be financial.
doesn't help at all, and probably hurts in the long-term.
My motive is to have a better, non-paranoid method to evaluate sources. It would benefit everyone, everywhere, on every steroid board to do that. I love that people are labmaxing sources and getting blood tests. But by "non-paranoid" I mean if you read some of the angrier all-caps posts on here out to anyone who doesn't use steroids, it would strike the average person as fitting the roid-raging stereotype to a T. That's NOT the attitude we want to have if we want steroids to be legal, ever, or at least decriminalized or reduced to a lower drug scheduling. It harms rational discussion here and makes people way too hostile for no reason and probably drives out sources who would otherwise cooperate with the source code of conduct.
But you had no idea what my motive was prior to just now, and you thought my motive MUST have been something else, for no reason. *That* is what I mean -- you should only conclude what you CAN know, as opposed to what you suspect. (Imagine if people could charge you as guilty based only on what they suspect.)
