Secret Sources, the SCOC and the Steroid Underground

[I_know_nothing]

Exactly, that's why I asked... Doesn't sound like there is anything at all catered to the members here, sounds like it's been tailor made for sources. We have been talking about changing the SCOC for the benefit of members, not the sources

how do you plan to change the SCOC for the members? that's the first point i was addressing. the older members know to question and not trust sources. but how do we educate new members? do you really think they're gonna take the time to read a member COC? as much as i wish they did the reality of it is that a majority of them are going straight to look for sources. the current SCOC is too lenient with sources, it allows them to disclose little and still "pass" the SCOC. as a result we get these long ass threads of questioning- you think new members are reading through all of those? hell no. so what im saying is have a more detailed and stringent SCOC that sources MUST past on their first post. if they dont delete it and remake a new one until they do past. why is this useful? because then when new members look for a new source and click on their thread they see that full disclosure with all the details- by seeing that they now have an expectation "oh ok this is what i need to be asking and seeing" and hopefully they take that and continue. i think this is just one of the first steps to helping curve the culture towards more education.

 

[Marcus]

how do you plan to change the SCOC for the members? that's the first point i was addressing. the older members know to question and not trust sources. but how do we educate new members? do you really think they're gonna take the time to read a member COC? as much as i wish they did the reality of it is that a majority of them are going straight to look for sources. the current SCOC is too lenient with sources, it allows them to disclose little and still "pass" the SCOC. as a result we get these long ass threads of questioning- you think new members are reading through all of those? hell no. so what im saying is have a more detailed and stringent SCOC that sources MUST past on their first post. if they dont delete it and remake a new one until they do past. why is this useful? because then when new members look for a new source and click on their thread they see that full disclosure with all the details- by seeing that they now have an expectation "oh ok this is what i need to be asking and seeing" and hopefully they take that and continue. i think this is just one of the first steps to helping curve the culture towards more education.

Aren't you a new member? And didn't you read it?

 

[I_know_nothing]

Aren't you a new member? And didn't you read it?

lol you think all new members are like me? highly doubt that haha

 

[MoriorInvictus]

how do you plan to change the SCOC for the members? that's the first point i was addressing. the older members know to question and not trust sources. but how do we educate new members? do you really think they're gonna take the time to read a member COC? as much as i wish they did the reality of it is that a majority of them are going straight to look for sources. the current SCOC is too lenient with sources, it allows them to disclose little and still "pass" the SCOC. as a result we get these long ass threads of questioning- you think new members are reading through all of those? hell no. so what im saying is have a more detailed and stringent SCOC that sources MUST past on their first post. if they dont delete it and remake a new one until they do past. why is this useful? because then when new members look for a new source and click on their thread they see that full disclosure with all the details- by seeing that they now have an expectation "oh ok this is what i need to be asking and seeing" and hopefully they take that and continue. i think this is just one of the first steps to helping curve the culture towards more education.

I don't get it...
You've been here 1 day and you have 80 something posts? WTF do you do all day long? Are you a fucking 16 year old nerd who's researched AAS too much?

And what do you mean "we educate new members"? You're a new member dip shit! How many cycles have you ran?

 

[Marcus]

lol you think all new members are like me? highly doubt that haha

I don't think ANY new member is like you

 

[Walker]

If new members are not willing to read through threads to get the necessary info to inform themselfs then they do not have the decipline or time involved with doing AAS's...its simple...no one is spoon feeding anyone ...I had to read through and ask questions along the way....so should everyone else...people are too lazy and complacent these days...

 

[I_know_nothing]

If new members are not willing to read through threads to get the necessary info to inform themselfs then they do not have the decipline or time involved with doing AAS's...its simple...no one is spoon feeding anyone ...I had to read through and ask questions along the way....so should everyone else...people are too lazy and complacent these days...

absolutely true. i feel the same way, if you're too lazy to do the research you shouldnt be involved in AAS. but i cant control people can i? new members are going to go and do it regardless. this is similar to the sourcing debate, either we sit back and let them run rampage or we can at least try to do something about it.

the "no one is spoon feeding anyone" is exactly why i think the SCOC should stay but be more stringent. by making a members COC we are spoon feeding. by making a more stringent SCOC sources will have to disclose more and hopefully new members that look at these threads are seeing the ttype of questions that sources need to be answering

 

[Walker]

this will only show someone who has decent gear, bunk gear or good gear.....it will not educate members on the safe and responsible usage of AAS's ....which is by far more important than finding a source...imo

 

[Voltrader]

@Marcus @Mr.Bravo @brutus79 @Voltrader

here are my thoughts on the SCOC- as a disclaimer if i repeat anything that's already been said the past, sorry that i didnt have time to read through hundreds of pages posts. also, i know i advocate educating new members as the #1 priority but until our culture changes where the majority of new members or lurkers are just looking for a source- we need to do the grunt work. we need to filter out the good from the bad sources. as we do this, hopefully new members see will what they should be doing and slowly we will see a culture change- just my hope.

anyways ill try my best to keep it short and go section by section:

1. pics and description
a. pictures of finished vials and powders, a substantial quantity as well so we know you're not just trying to sell 20-30 vials. but that you actually have a decent amount and you have invested
b. pictures of lab equipment IN ACTION. show us the filter working, show us pics of autoclave working, show us actual vials being made under a flow hood. it's all to easy to get pics from a uni and throw up a time stamp. show us the equipment working with a time stamp "i am fucking brewing steroids to sell"
c. descriptioon of your full process for test E. take us through the entire fucking process. there is no trade secret or secret way to do it, we all fucking know the methods. tell us exactly how you are doing it

2. communciation
a. secure email + provide public PGP key. needs to be verified by a member that you actually know how to fucking use PGP

3. full disclosure- simple question: where have you sourced before and where you are sourcing now. the board focuses too much on this sometimes with accusing sources of being previous sources. if we're asking the right questions this will become obvious in time. maybe not ASAP but immediately accusing sources of having previous handles is bullshit and not effective. shitty sources will be outed, as they always have.

4. testing
a. minimum sources MUST labmax all products, oils and powders
b. a proven attempt at acquiring shit like MS/HPLC/NMR. this board makes it seem like i can walk down the street and get all my shit tested at the local uni. that's not how it works at all. we need to be more realistic. what does this mean? sources that come here with zero attempt at further testing can fuck off, they obvi dont care about their product and just wanna sell. sources that a proven attempt- who have you tried to contact, what avenues have you attempted, what friends have you asked about testing? we need to be reasonable brothers- to ask these sources for these tests + the knowledge to interpret them is too much. instead what we want to know is "are these sources willing and actively trying and caring about their product". if so we can be more assured that when/if they get access to MS/HPLC/NMR they will act upon it.

5. references
a. stop this bullshit with not accepting reviews from other boards, esp reddit. all these boards we have the same goal, i mean who the fuck wants to get scammed? who the hell actually wants underdosed shit. we need to be more open to other boards, but be skeptic. what does that mean? it means if everyone from a certain board is sucking the dick of one source, we need to be skeptic. here is was astro, reddit it is topgear and rage, evo is domestic express. let's accept their reviews at face value but also always be wary!
b. no fucking grandfathering. all sources need to go through the SCOC. no one gets a free pass, if you're a good source you can easily answer the questions and get through the SCOC. any source who is avoiding the SCOC is to be questioned even more. anyone selling over PM or privately who reach out to others HAVE to go through the SCOC. what does that mean? if you're a private source who sells by word of mouth that's fine. bt if you're actively recruiting other buyers through PM, come out of the fucking shadows and go through this SCOC
c. only one thread of sources to push product- if at first attempt a source doesn't make it through the SCOC- needs to be requested to be deleted. come back and try again when your shit is up to date. we can't have these threads where the 1st 50 pages the source doesnt pass and then on page 52, 67,83, and 98 the source provides the information needed to pass. this all needs to be condensed on the first fucking post. new members arent going to be searching through hundreds of pages for the legitmacy of a source.

in the end it's all about the details as @Dr JIM says "devil is in the details". good sources arent afraid of our questions. why? because they know they got nothing to fucking hide. answer all our questions and dont hide shit. on the flip side, let's approach sources with questioning but not aggression. aggression puts everyone on edge. we want he edge but we dont want to be know as a forum where everyone is shitting on everyone. brothers, we all want the same goal- good fucking gear. let's work together to find that- there may be sources out there that actually do have decent gear but we're running their asses off. as a result we are just gonna get all the shitty sources who backtalk and fight back and scam the shit outa us. these are just a few things off the top of my head

Lol...good to se you just whipped that up.
As far as I go I no longer support any SCOC. I like discussions, questions and pointing out red flags seems to be going smoother. The smart consumer can pick up on all of this. The SCoC is an endorsement and I don't endorse any of them.

 

[I_know_nothing]

this will only show someone who has decent gear, bunk gear or good gear.....it will not educate members on the safe and responsible usage of AAS's ....which is by far more important than finding a source...imo

very true, but i would think members coming to the underground at looking for sources more than they are for responsible use of AAS? there are other subforums for that, now whether they read those are not is beyond our control. but if we can at least help them distinguish the good from the bad sources is that not better than nothing? we would hope that they type of questioning and culture would lead members who are just looking for sources to become more curious about AAS and research into other aspects as well

 

[I_know_nothing]

Lol...good to se you just whipped that up.
As far as I go I no longer support any SCOC. I like discussions, questions and pointing out red flags seems to be going smoother. The smart consumer can pick up on all of this. The SCoC is an endorsement and I don't endorse any of them.

i hate that sources and new members see the SCOC as an endorsement. that's not how it should be. the SCOC should contain the most fundamental but detailed questions that every source should answer. why do i think this is useful? so when sources come here they know exactly what they need to answer. im all for discussions and questions, but if the SCOC can help cut 100 pages off source threads of questioning thatd be much more helpful. am i saying we question sources less? hell no, im just saying that an SCOC type thing could help us in giving sources "these are the questions you have to fucking answer" rather than having 100 pages of going through the questions one by one

 

[johnnyBALLZ]

i hate that sources and new members see the SCOC as an endorsement. that's not how it should be. the SCOC should contain the most fundamental but detailed questions that every source should answer. why do i think this is useful? so when sources come here they know exactly what they need to answer. im all for discussions and questions, but if the SCOC can help cut 100 pages off source threads of questioning thatd be much more helpful. am i saying we question sources less? hell no, im just saying that an SCOC type thing could help us in giving sources "these are the questions you have to fucking answer" rather than having 100 pages of going through the questions one by one

You ready to tell us your old screen name now??

 

[Voltrader]

If you don't see why the SCOC doesn't work I don't know what to tell you I personally see it now considering I stood and fought under it since its inception. It is an open invitation and coming up with rules for sources is exactly that. It moves away from the
testing , labmaxing and reviews to find the legit sources across cyber space.
This will attract the good ones they will want threads and they will look forward to the challenges of testing here.

 

[Voltrader]

You ready to tell us your old screen name now??

Come on I am trying to get him to 100 post in the shortest time ever in Meso history. Slightly entertaining JBZ.

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

lol you think all new members are like me? highly doubt that haha

No, because they are actually NEW members, not former members pretending to be new members.

I notice you're ignoring all posts about your old username. You might as well disclose that now because the questions aren't going to stop.

 

[Voltrader]

@CensoredBoardsSuck I think we can figure this out. The writing style is very familiar. Now there is the whole not capitalizing thing .....this is a diversion.

 

[johnnyBALLZ]

@CensoredBoardsSuck I think we can figure this out. The writing style is very familiar. Now there is the whole not capitalizing thing .....this is a diversion.

Yepp, he wasn't doing it with his first few posts though.. Must've had the idea after he got started.

 

[brutus79]

i hate that sources and new members see the SCOC as an endorsement. that's not how it should be. the SCOC should contain the most fundamental but detailed questions that every source should answer. why do i think this is useful? so when sources come here they know exactly what they need to answer. im all for discussions and questions, but if the SCOC can help cut 100 pages off source threads of questioning thatd be much more helpful. am i saying we question sources less? hell no, im just saying that an SCOC type thing could help us in giving sources "these are the questions you have to fucking answer" rather than having 100 pages of going through the questions one by one

I know one thing- the first source that rolls in here and meets all the "demands" of your proposed "new" scoc will be you with yet another handle. I don't care about your other handle. What are some of the names you have sourced with on Meso?

At times like this I lament the fact that we overuse the word schill and are quick to think a member handle is the source because the certainty I have concerning your past is ironclad.

 

[Mr.Bravo]

Thats why I love this board if in fact your hypothesis is true we will find out it all comes out in the wash.

 

[Marcus]

I know one thing- the first source that rolls in here and meets all the "demands" of your proposed "new" scoc will be you with yet another handle

Fucking exactly... Who are these proposed changes to the SCOC really suppose to help