SkankPharma Domestic USA PCT Shop

[Millard]

I'm tired / retarded. misread. ye, guy needs a life. he's so busy living yours that there's nothing left.

@Millard why does BBBG get banned for spamming but @Carlitosaso hasnt yet? Shit has gone on for weeks friend.

@Millard View attachment 157056

One obvious difference is there has been no blatant/repeated disregard/disrespect of the rules/admins/mods. Also, this "spam" is posted over the course of several weeks rather than a matter of hours or days. Should this matter? Should members be restricted to how frequently they criticize/insult using essentially a cut and paste message? Once? Twice? Three times? Ever? Per hour? Per day? Per week? Per month?

Do you guys support these type of bans in principle? Or just for specific sources and specific members? And not other sources and other members?

 

[nealcaffrey16]

for the duration, I'm not sure. I think heuristics might be best applied here, and I think your judgment there would be fair. It's definitely something thst should be equally applied though to all instances. Hope that helps somewhat.

 

[SkankHunt]

Ok @Carlitosaso youre free to continue shitposting. @Millard is ok with it. Enjoy brother have fun.

 

[Avnj5]

Nice same as the Aspen. Thanks bro.

Nice same as the Aspen. Thanks bro

Did the Bulgarians implement a code like the Turks ? Is there a pace to check ?

 

[Millard]

Ok @Carlitosaso youre free to continue shitposting. @Millard is ok with it. Enjoy brother have fun.

Don't pretend to speak for me. You certainly are all for banning members who spam/troll sources when it's convenient for you. I don't recall your overwhelming support in other instances.

 

[Millard]

for the duration, I'm not sure. I think heuristics might be best applied here, and I think your judgment there would be fair. It's definitely something thst should be equally applied though to all instances. Hope that helps somewhat.

It's really not easy. It is often a damned if you do and damned if you don't proposition.

But I agree. Consistent application is the way to go but rarely are two situations identical. They are often apples and oranges. As is this case, where the "spam" occurred over the course of weeks rather than the other case where spam occurred over hours.

 

[Mcflyfast]

Arachis oil. No pip ever

Beat me to it. Yes Arachis oil

 

[Mcflyfast]

Did the Bulgarians implement a code like the Turks ? Is there a pace to check ?

That I know of, no, but they do have an app in Russia and it's active.

Also, this implementation will be taking effect worldwide soon.

 

[SkankHunt]

Don't pretend to speak for me. You certainly are all for banning members who spam/troll sources when it's convenient for you. I don't recall your overwhelming support in other instances.

Offering other sources 5 grand to get BBBGs info so he could send him a hot pack was over the line yet Naps wasn’t permanently banned for it.

That’s the only ban I’ve supported. And monsterman for doxing 20 members here.

 

[Millard]

for the duration, I'm not sure. I think heuristics might be best applied here, and I think your judgment there would be fair. It's definitely something thst should be equally applied though to all instances. Hope that helps somewhat.

I feel uncomfortable limiting any member to a specific number of posts to criticize/insult/attack a source. For example, if someone had a bad experience with a source, should they not be allowed to post a weekly "warning" that is essentially the same? Would most would agree that hourly would be excessive/disruptive?

Maybe I should start another thread to exclusively discuss these type of issues.

 

[SkankHunt]

I feel uncomfortable limiting any member to a specific number of posts to criticize/insult/attack a source. For example, if someone had a bad experience with a source, should they not be allowed to post a weekly "warning" that is essentially the same? Would most would agree that hourly would be excessive/disruptive?

Maybe I should start another thread to exclusively discuss these type of issues.

They can post as much as they want, all I’m asking for is proof brother. He says I sold him fake bold? I don’t even have bold. Let him prove it. That’s all I’m saying. If someone is saying a source has fake shit, then post up some proof.

 

[Millard]

That’s the only ban I’ve supported.

So you're saying you don't support banning anyone for "spamming" a source thread? Does this mean you don't support banning @Carlitosaso for "spamming" your thread?

 

[Avnj5]

That I know of, no, but they do have an app in Russia and it's active.

Also, this implementation will be taking effect worldwide soon.

New norditropin has them. Btw I think gh is becoming illegal in Russia

 

[SkankHunt]

So you're saying you don't support banning anyone for "spamming" a source thread? Does this mean you don't support banning @Carlitosaso for "spamming" your thread?

No, I don’t. Doxing members or posting threats are the only thing I consider being a lifetime ban.

I’m bringing this to your attention because BBBG was literally posting the exact same message on Naps thread and he was given a temporary ban. I spoke to the Meso Admin and asked if it was considered trolling. He said it’s borderline but not really. As you mentioned BBBG was doing it hourly and consistently so you’ve made yourself clear. I’m just looking for clarification of what’s considered trolling and what’s not.

 

[Dr.Leary]

He’s a competitor. He has 130 posts. 98 of them are him attacking me.

Unfortunately this is the new Meso. You’d think if I scammed someone they’d post here. I don’t even want to share my labs here anymore.

When I first joined meso I saw you on here the most testing everything from everyone and I'm sure alot of it was your own funds I just thought how stand up that was of you to do for all of us! You'd be the last person I'd ever suspect as a scammer! ... and I'm not even a customer as I havnt ordered anything from you (yet) .... just my opinion

 

[Millard]

They can post as much as they want, all I’m asking for is proof brother. He says I sold him fake bold? I don’t even have bold. Let him prove it. That’s all I’m saying. If someone is saying a source has fake shit, then post up some proof.

Proof has never been a prerequisite when criticizing a source. You've been here long enough to know that. It certainly would be nice. I strongly encourage it. Facts matter. And there is often a shortage. Nonetheless, MESO is known for giving wide discretion to source criticism with or without facts. You know this.

I like evidence too. The source name-calling and generic spammer labels have limited effectiveness without it. I've posted about this before. And at least one person took me up on the challenge to show how it's done (see below):

I understand the concern about efficiently communicating rapidly changing developments in the black market. It may be a good idea to create a thread to make case against a particular vendor e.g. "Case against XYZ Labs" or "Do NOT buy from XYZ Labs".

What I would recommend against is calling every BAD lab a scammer. The word "scammer" is so overused that it is has become largely uninformative. As a result, it is often dismissed by a significant percentage of consumers.

There are many instances where "known scammers" continue to recruit hundreds of customers many of which are mostly satisfied with the service; customers who have repeated positive experiences with a source aren't going give much credibility to a generic, non-specific scammer alert.

This doesn't mean that there is no basis for the scammer alert. It just means that the reasons for the scammer alert have not been communicated in a manner that adequately warns consumers of potential problems with a source.

Rather than paint BAD sources with broad designations only, it would be much more useful and effective to provide explicit detail. In essence, create a thread and make a case, including as much detail as possible, about why consumers should not use a particular vendor. For example, here is a non-inclusive list of reasons that vendors have fallen under the umbrella of the "scammer" designation. The availability of these reasons may allow consumers to make better decisions.

• Arrested by law enforcement
• Supply and/or distribution chain arrested by law enforcement
• Becomes confidential informant for law enforcement
• Takes money and never ships product
• Takes money and selectively ships product
• Very complicated/restrictive/ambiguous reship policy in instances of customs seizure
• Only re-ships once in instances of customs seizure notice
• Never re-ships in instances of customs seizure
• Ships product with microbial contamination or visible contaminants
• Ships underdosed product
• Ships product with androgen other than that listed on label
• Ships product with no detectable androgens
• Ships wrong product or does not ship entire order
• Misrepresents UGL products as FDA-approved
• Does not offer replacement products to dissatisfied customers
• Packages shipped in a sloppy manner that results in damaged product
• Packages shipped in insecure manner that increases risk of customs seizure
• Takes excessive amount of time to ship order
• Responds to negative customer feedback with threats of violence or other
• Responds to negative customer feedback with organized shill attack
• Responds to negative customer feedback with dismissive or rude responses
• Customer service is inconsistent
• Takes excessive amount of time to respond to inquiries
• Fails to provide secure email address
• Fails to provide pictures of paraphernalia used in production
• Sells overpriced product
• Source is new and has no feedback and/or history

MANWHORE / Voodoo has sold members under dosed gear, bunk gear, gear that has failed HPLC testing, gear that has led to members being hospitalized, products that have failed labmax tests, products that have performed poorly on bloodtests, under filled vials, and bunk gear brewed with poor sterility.

MANWHORE has also demonstrated deranged and incredibly dangerous behavior. MANWHORE has made up lies about Meso members in order to discredit them and to silence them. MANWHORE has also accused customers of being reverse scammers without evidence, and has accused members of being reps for competing companies without evidence in an attempt to discredit them.

MANWHORE does not take any security measures, and by openly selling gear without obfuscating his identity, he presents an incredible risk to potential customers.

MANWHORE has indicated through his postings on Meso a severe lack of sterility in the brewing process, a lack of testing of finished products, a lack of testing of raw materials, as well as a poor understanding of brewing gear safely. MANWHORE / Voodoo gear is therefore a huge risk to consumers who are looking to avoid infection.

MANWHORE also discredits any form of testing performed on his gear, including HPLC, labmax, and blood tests. MANWHORE actively mocks and makes fun of members testing his gear.

Specific Instances of MANWHORE's deranged / dangerous behavior and potential dangers to consumers.

• Accusing a MESO-Rx member of being a rep and making up lies about him in order to discredit him
• Accusing the same MESO-Rx member of the same thing again in an attempt to discredit him
• Accusing another MESO member of being a rep in an attempt to discredit him
• Accusing members of being liars without evidence
• Making vague threats to a MESO member
• Mocking testing methods
• Mocking testing methods again
• Using poor filtration methods in the brewing process
• Using poor and unproven sterility procedures
• Selling bunk Test Prop
• Selling Test Prop that failed user submitted testing
• Selling Test E that is underdosed
• Selling underfilled vials
• Selling bunk Cialis
• Selling gear that led to a member being hospitalized
• Posting inaccurate / false information regarding testosterone
• Attempting to use the 'private lab' designation to circumvent criticism despite openly promoting gear
• Openly promoting / hyping his own gear across countless threads and posts in an attempt to procure sales despite claiming he is 'private'
• Shows disdain for his customers
• Accusing a MESO member of being a reverse scammer without evidence
• Accusing a customer who has unsatisfied with his service / gear of being a reverse scammer without evidence
• Performs no real testing on his raw materials
• Disregards HPLC test indicating product is bunk
• Lied about an HPLC test indicating his Tren-E is bunk in order to discredit the test
• Takes zero security measures
• Sells gear openly on an account with 11,000 posts
• Doesn't understand basic security measures
• Potential security risk and lack of security possibly leading to a customer initially losing his money
• Doesn't even lift weights anymore

MANWHORE / Voodoo has had more issues with security, product, and customer service than most other labs have had in such a short period of time on Meso.

Members should avoid MANWHORE / Voodoo gear.

 

[Night_Owl]

Apologies @SkankHunt I don't mean to derail your thread but since @Millard is here I have a quick somewhat related question.

@Millard what are your thoughts on sources posting tracking information to "prove" that they made a shipment?

I don't have a particular source in mind, but sometimes I see it happen and it is concerning. With most postal carriers, you can just put the tracking number in a box and it will tell you the address the package is heading to.

 

[Mcflyfast]

New norditropin has them. Btw I think gh is becoming illegal in Russia

Yes they do and all new Russian meds.

I heard this and asked the other day but it's a rumor and nothing else.

 

[SkankHunt]

Proof has never been a prerequisite when criticizing a source. You've been here long enough to know that. It certainly would be nice. I strongly encourage it. Facts matter. And there is often a shortage. Nonetheless, MESO is known for giving wide discretion to source criticism with or without facts. You know this.

I like evidence too. The source name-calling and generic spammer labels have limited effectiveness without it. I've posted about this before. And at least one person took me up on the challenge to show how it's done (see below):

That’s an excellent post. Point proven sir.

 

[Millard]

As you mentioned BBBG was doing it hourly and consistently so you’ve made yourself clear. I’m just looking for clarification of what’s considered trolling and what’s not.

As long as you understand the difference. I want to consistently apply the same standards to everyone regardless of the popularity of the member and or source.

It's often a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation because most people will support banning an unpopular member or unpopular source but be outraged when you ban a popular member or popular source for the same rule violation/behavior. Moderation based on principle rather than popularity is the goal.