Secret Sources, the SCOC and the Steroid Underground

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

There seems to be some confusion about what this discussion means, and whether there should be a vote, etc. Putting "rules" in place is censorship. That's not what Meso is about. This exercise isn't about changing the rules; it's about changing the culture. It's about changing the perception that Meso is a source forum when it isn't - through discussion.

As Brutus suggested, think bigger, guys.

 

[mghoward74]

Intentionally or unintentionally, it became the source's how-to guide of selling steroids on MESO.

If you don't won't sourcing in the underground ground....SAY IT! Or type it either way.

if sourcing is not permitted then all sources need to go. It's quite simple

It has nothing to do with censorship.

If anything the scoc is an educational tool that has serve me well.

 

[brutus79]

I don't mind being called out on the carpet. I wouldn't have posted if I was....

What you may not be seeing (or maybe you are) but people are already slamming SRC's and telling them to get lost. As Dr.Jim has pointed out the SCOC did do a lot of good and was pure in its intent. It was one of the reasons I joined this forum. I viewed it as a place where like minded people who use AAS can stand together to make sure that all of these suppliers out there cannot continue to fuck us! As they have done for many years.

I'm at work as well or I would apply more effort to provide some kind of concise input. I like the Member code of conduct idea but again the minority should not make all of the decisions.

I wasn't even suggesting a poll was the way to go- I was saying if you thought a poll should be made, make one dude!

I know some members are "shooting" at sources... but they are doing something at least. Shake things up!

 

[Millard]

There has been some discussion in another thread that I think belongs here.

Will this "New Direction" that everyone is pushing for be put to vote? Or will certain members simply choose to enforce their perception of how the board should be run? The reason I ask is because I believe not everyone is for this change and those members should be allowed to speak their minds without fear of rebuke.

Now me personally I don't really care, but I have seen how some people on here throw their weight around by using harsh language and bullying tactics to get their way and that’s fine by me when there is good purpose behind those actions. It's when changes like this that occur that those same people apply those learned behaviors towards the members in this forum that disagree with them. That I am not OK with!!

There should be an anonymous voting system for these changes before members start enforcing their own self-declared "rules". But before a vote can be done there has to be a new thread that clearly defines what is allowed in the underground forum and what isn't.

Again just my 2 cents....

It's far premature to start trying to impose any self-declared guidelines for anyone to follow. There's no rush. We need a dialogue.

There are a lot different perspectives. Different ideas. And a lot of passion. We need more clarity. We need to careful consider all the options, the alternatives, the consequences of change. This could take weeks. Even months. Patience.

 

[boodecarlo]

Damn boys. I gotta say look at the bullshit that's goin on because of the sourcing here. I got beat by sources that were here. It didn't stop them from screwing many many people here. Them sourcing here isn't helping shit. So I gotta agree with NO SOURCING HERE.

 

[Moose]

I think we need a poll.

 

[MoriorInvictus]

It's far premature to start trying to impose any self-declared guidelines for anyone to follow. There's no rush. We need a dialogue.

There are a lot different perspective. Different ideas. And a lot of passion. We need more clarity. We need to careful consider all the options, the alternative, the consequences of change. This could weeks. Patience.

I couldn't agree more!! However some individuals have already taken it upon themselves to start policing the underground forum.

 

[Abuckeye]

It seems as if a lot of people don't want change. They don't want to see the bigger picture. They just want to continue on the same path.
By what's being said in some other threads members are afraid to speak their minds. If not a poll then maybe we should stop bashing others for having opinions different from others. Im sure everyone wants this culture change to be nurtured in the right direction so let's hear everyone's opinion and have a sensible debate on their opinion and not a debate on how stupid they seem to be.

 

[dmt31]

It seems as if a lot of people don't want change. They don't want to see the bigger picture. They just want to continue on the same path.
By what's being said in some other threads members are afraid to speak their minds. If not a poll then maybe we should stop bashing others for having opinions different from others. Im sure everyone wants this culture change to be nurtured in the right direction so let's hear everyone's opinion and have a sensible debate on their opinion and not a debate on how stupid they seem to be.

Just because someone doesn't want change, doesn't mean they don't see the 'bigger picture' and that there is anything wrong with going down 'the same path'.... quite frankly this path has helped flush out a lot of bullshit sources who otherwise would still be actively selling at a high volume without a single fuck to give about how bad the gear they were selling is. If that isn't change for the positive, then I have no idea what is.

 

[MoriorInvictus]

I wasn't even suggesting a poll was the way to go- I was saying if you thought a poll should be made, make one dude!

I know some members are "shooting" at sources... but they are doing something at least. Shake things up!

I will be more than happy to start the poll. But as Millard stated we need to discuss what exactly we are voting on before the poll is started. I think we are a few days (if not weeks) away from that. IMO.

I really don't give a fuck if people want to bash the SRC's and try to push them out. The problem still will exist as others have pointed out. There will always be sources trying to push their products to people. Especially on a forum labeled "Steroid Underground". Economics 101 brother!! Nothing we can do about it and as we've seen with the most recent SRC (that fuck stick from the UK) they are starting to push back.

 

[brutus79]

It seems as if a lot of people don't want change. They don't want to see the bigger picture. They just want to continue on the same path.
By what's being said in some other threads members are afraid to speak their minds. If not a poll then maybe we should stop bashing others for having opinions different from others. Im sure everyone wants this culture change to be nurtured in the right direction so let's hear everyone's opinion and have a sensible debate on their opinion and not a debate on how stupid they seem to be.

Honestly the only bashing I saw (and gladly participated in) was for saying this is a source board.... and the founder clearly stated it is not
That and the free sample good ol boy network...

People need to fight- we are all very passionate about this and have high testosterone levels. Needs to happen- when the dust settles we shall see all the viable options.

 

[flenser]

I have a problem with the idea that members should force a source to leave by essentially spamming any thread a source opens. This is a form of censorship, and it violates the spirit of the underground if not the letter. Spamming IS against the rules. If we’re going to take this approach, we might as well designate moderators and let them delete source threads.

 

[Millard]

If you don't won't sourcing in the underground ground....SAY IT! Or type it either way.

if sourcing is not permitted then all sources need to go. It's quite simple

It has nothing to do with censorship.

If anything the scoc is an educational tool that has serve me well.

I've been saying it for two years. I'm a broken record.

And no, it's not quite that simple: I don't think it's a choice between source participation vs. no source participation.

I think we should welcome sources with open arms BUT ONLY to answer MEMBER questions and nothing more; we just shouldn't encourage them to use the subforum as a sales platform.

How do I envision the forum?: I want information. As much information as possible. And then some.

This is the best way to help members navigate the world of the steroid underground, protect themselves and minimize harm.

However, once you eliminate sources from the conversation, you lose a lot of valuable information. I think this would be a poor move.

I recognize that trying to have a forum that encourages source participation but discourages sourcing is a tall order. It's practically impossible to eliminate the latter in an uncensored forum. But if enough members want it, the balance will decidedly tip towards an information platform and away from a sales platform.

 

[Big Mike]

Brothers,

Re-read Mr. Baker's post, he is not and will not enforce any type of censorship. What he wants is for us (all of us) to brainstorm and create ideas then examine their future ramifications if they were applied. He said it many times, "Dialogue," not fighting, not calling bros out, but rather, "Patience," a community or a band of bros coming together! Every member new or old is entitled to their opinion and if one's opinion is different than yours so be it. If we can't get past this, Im afraid no improvement or positive change can take place.


Respect,

Big Mike

 

[Millard]

I have a problem with the idea that members should force a source to leave by essentially spamming any thread a source opens. This is a form of censorship, and it violates the spirit of the underground if not the letter. Spamming IS against the rules. If we’re going to take this approach, we might as well designate moderators and let them delete source threads.

I agree. Dick pictures or not - spam just sucks. We should find a way to extract as much information possible from threads rather than stifle them with spam.

 

[Millard]

Just because someone doesn't want change, doesn't mean they don't see the 'bigger picture' and that there is anything wrong with going down 'the same path'.... quite frankly this path has helped flush out a lot of bullshit sources who otherwise would still be actively selling at a high volume without a single fuck to give about how bad the gear they were selling is. If that isn't change for the positive, then I have no idea what is.

But can it be improved upon? Are you saying not?

 

[DirtyRandy]

So we still want sources here for informational purposes and expect them to not actually source here?

 

[Oregongearhead]

So we still want sources here for informational purposes and expect them to not actually source here?

 

[dmt31]

But can it be improved upon? Are you saying not?

Absolutely it can be improved upon. But, as I'm sure you're seeing, people are going through various extreme answers that are not feasible, but also silly, for lack of a better term.

At this point anybody who can comprehend basic english understands what your goals were, and more importantly what your vision for this whole forum was. We all appreciate what you have done here and more importantly respect it. That said, it's just not what the reality is. That has to be accepted on some level.

The sense I'm getting from a lot of the people posting here is that the only answer is to go to the opposite extreme. Not because they necessarily think it's the best path, but it's what they think YOU, Millard Baker, want. To me that's just kind of ridiculous. This forum, and all forums, exist because of user generated content. The vision of the creator should be taken into account, of course, but if the content that is most popular and generates the most interest from the users is a certain type, that has to be respected. At least in my opinion.

Do I think it's a good idea to have an open source forum that any idiot with a couple of beakers and a hot plate can peddle their shit on? Of course not. Do I think that there is a better way of handling this problem of sources? Yes. But, I don't know what the best approach is. I have my own ideas, but my ideas aren't as important as the ideas of the group as a whole. Just like we can't have every source who ever wanted to sell some AAS posting here and ruining people's cycles, and more importantly their health, we can't have just a couple of rogue members take it upon themselves to decide what the other users here want to see and participate in.

So to come full circle, I do think there is a way to improve upon this, but it really doesn't seem like we have even started that dialogue in a productive way yet. It seems like the people who are being more reasonable are being drowned out by the extremists and we haven't made much progress in terms of a solution yet. There are ideas, but no real plan of action. Ideas are great, but they're worthless without a direction and a way to implement them.

 

[Millard]

So we still want sources here for informational purposes and expect them to not actually source here?

Members have successfully stopped many sources from sourcing with no intervention from big brother. Eliminate? No. Tilt the balance? Yes.

I'm surprised so many people were fans of big brother that believe rules and oversight are the only ways to modify behavior.