UK GENTECH LABS

[Thor Mjölnir]

Oh, look who just became a tough guy!! hahah



His point is it's not his place to say anything. Same as no one jumped in between you and CBS just for the fuck of it. CBS said he was done with this section of the forum and this twat jumped at the opportunity to run his mouth knowing CBS wouldn't be replying.

CBS is my friend and I don't appreciate jerkoffs coming out of the woodwork now when they've previously had no interaction with him.

big bro Johnny ballz has a point !!!! That's a stand up man right there!!

 

[WCL]

following this thread, I feel like this quote is relevant more than ever:

I check in here at least once a week to see what is going on for the entertainment value of things.

I have to say that I appreciate each and every one of you guys, it makes me feel great evey time I log in here. I can't think of many ways that I can express my boundless gratitude to you all for all you have done for me but I will try right now. I feel like every time I click on a new thread I am gearing up to once again watch a pack of retards try to fuck a porcupine. They are all standing around thinking I know this can feel good like it does when random dudes come and dickthroat my crackhead mother so why isn't it working for me?

Well the reason is technique and approach mongo's that is why!! You new guys wonder why all labs seem like scammers it's because the "vets" here chase them all away because it's the only place they will ever feel like men! How did they become "meso vets" by default of course, They are like the retards who can sit thru a whole episode of blues clues, they may learn a number or letter here and there so to the retards who can't sit thru that whole episode they seem like genuine genius individuals!!!

You wonder if they chase all the labs away where do they get their premium aas products? I'll tell you kids, eroids, evo, mg, pm, iron den, sf, asf and a host of others. Of course they stay low key in these places so they can come back here and condem the, also because a real board whether a real ug board, sponsor board or review board would not put up with their shit. Not because of restrictions but because they would be called out on their lack of knowledge and general mental deficiency's.

This completely retarded scoc created by 4 or 5 guys and amended by 4 or 5 more is the heart of the reason you will only see scammers here. Be sure to never post positive feedback on a real lab because that makes you a shill, never recomend only condem. If you do have negativity though you will get 50 likes on your idiot meso posts so why not just make a bunch up? Take that strategy and you will be a well polished meso supervet in no time. Why would any legit source ever put up with that, why take these security risks, why let some imbeciles grill you? They won't so you will end up with titan, dunamis, and the brand new jewel of meso thanes labs.

So I especially want to thank @millard for creating millard bakers charity home for mongoloids, scammers and schitzophranics, i'm sure it is just what the man had in mind when he created the place!!

 

[MANWHORE]

What did I miss ?

 

[weighted chinup]

What did I miss ?

Well look who decided to crawl out of his nest!

And nice choice of thread to announce your return in. You're quite the opportunist, aren't you?

So how's business MW?

 

[Millard]

Being mean or talking shit was never the problem with the underground like some members have made it out to be.

The underground doesn't need to be nicer or more polite, it needs more people who THINK critically. We just lost one.

Mission accomplished?

Do you honestly disagree with my efforts to reduce personal attacks, insults and name-calling in order to facilitate more productive discussion? Do you think more personal attacks, insults and name-calling will promote more productive discussion?

It's not about encouraging people to be nicer or more polite as you suggest. Some of the most productive debates are also have some of the most intense, passionate and ruthless participants. It is about reducing the ad hominem attacks that usually derail debates.

As much as I personally like @CensoredBoardsSuck and appreciate his critical-thinking skills, insight and extensive contributions to the forum, I will stand by principle. It has always served me well to consistently operate the forum by principle rather than give anyone special treatment.

I share a passion for free speech with @CensoredBoardsSuck and empathize with his frustrations at being the target of criticism and disagreement. But he knows very well that this comes with the territory of an uncensored forum. It is exhausting but necessary for free-spirited debate. I sincerely hope to see and welcome his return. This doesn't mean I have to agree with him on everything.

 

[MANWHORE]

I don't
Especially with that gay avatar ..

This board is about pussy ..
Well bbing too but that is
Just a way to get more pussy

 

[weighted chinup]

Do you honestly disagree with my efforts to reduce personal attacks, insults and name-calling in order to facilitate more productive discussion? Do you think more personal attacks, insults and name-calling will promote more productive discussion?

It's not about encouraging people to be nicer or more polite as you suggest. Some of the most productive debates are also some of the most intense, passionate and ruthless participants. It is about reducing the ad hominem attacks that usually derail debates.

As much as I personally like @CensoredBoardsSuck and appreciate his critical-thinking skills, insight and extensive contributions to the forum, I will stand by principle. It has always served me well to consistently operate the forum by principle rather than give anyone special treatment.

I share a passion for free speech with @CensoredBoardsSuck and empathize with his frustrations at being the target of criticism and disagreement. But he knows very well that this comes with the territory of an uncensored forum. It is exhausting but necessary for free-spirited debate. I sincerely hope to see and welcome his return.

I don't disagree with the goal of wanting to reduce personal attacks and insults.

However, I don't necessarily feel that admonishing members for their behavior in such a specific way was the ideal way to do it.

It just felt too hamfisted. Maybe I'm not looking at it objectively enough, I will concede to that if you feel that is the case.

Do I personally feel that personal attacks, ad-hominem, insults, etc is the most productive way to discuss something?

No. But It seems that many Meso members were big fans of this approach when it comes to the steroid underground or when dealing with scammers. I feel that based on what I've observed in the Underground that it is effective when dealing with bad actors, scammers, and liars - to an extent.

My statement about people wanting a 'nicer' or more polite Meso was not directed at you, but rather other members who have recently decided to deplore the antics they once enjoyed and took part in for the longest time. Now it seems like these individuals would choose politeness over fearless criticism and critical thinking.

 

[Millard]

I don't disagree with the goal of wanting to reduce personal attacks and insults.

However, I don't necessarily feel that admonishing members for their behavior in such a specific way was the ideal way to do it.

It just felt too hamfisted. Maybe I'm not looking at it objectively enough, I will concede to that if you feel that is the case.

No, you may be right. I didn't anticipate CBS' reaction. I thought it would have been more characteristic of him to engage in the discussion. That did not happen.

I still think two highly intelligent, educated and contributing members who engage in such behavior is counterproductive. What is the best way and most appropriate time to make this statement? I don't know. The message is important even if the delivery is not optimal. I will take the risk of being impolite and/or creating resentment if I think it will improve forum discussion in the long-term.

Do I personally feel that personal attacks, ad-hominem, insults, etc is the most productive way to discuss something?

No. But It seems that many Meso members were big fans of this approach when it comes to the steroid underground or when dealing with scammers. I feel that based on what I've observed in the Underground that it is effective when dealing with bad actors, scammers, and liars - to an extent.

I don't agree with forums that have a blanket prohibition on personal attacks. Sometimes, personal attacks are the most appropriate and logical course of action. Most of the time they are not.

I agree that it has been effective to a certain degree in the underground. Yet even in these cases, productive discussion is sometimes thwarted and the opportunity for greater information is lost. It may be good for applying easy labels such as "scammer". As you know, I prefer much more descriptive and detailed information when evaluating sources. I will take "effective" any day but I will prefer and encourage "more effective" approaches if available.

 

[weighted chinup]

I still think two highly intelligent, educated and contributing members who engage in such behavior is counterproductive. What is the best way and most appropriate time to make this statement? I don't know. The message is important even if the delivery is not optimal. I will take the risk of being impolite and/or creating resentment if I think it will improve forum discussion in the long-term.

I don't think anyone should hesitate to approach an issue they feel passionate about.

I have been outspoken about certain issues that resulted in a fair bit of resentment from more than a few folks I would reckon.

In this case though, I would say that both participants are well aware of the argument to be made in favor of a more productive dialogue. But both participants still engaged each other in a way that one might consider to be 'counter-productive' or inefficient.

That is partly why I feel such a specific 'call-out' to two members in this particular dispute wasn't the ideal approach. I personally don't feel it would have any positive effects on the course of the discussion given that both members are intelligent and understand the argument in favor of a more productive dialogue.

Sometimes, personal attacks are the most appropriate and logical course of action. Most of the time they are not.

I agree with this.

I believe that personal attacks have use, albeit a fairly limited use. An argument I have made before in favor of personal attacks against sources or bad actors is that we have seen many examples of people who have revealed an ugly side to their character when faced with insults / personal criticism. These individuals had revealed a temperament that is unacceptable to have when in the business of selling AAS.

This is information that might not have been readily available. It sounds like I'm reaching here, I know.

As you know, I prefer much more descriptive and detailed information when evaluating sources. I will take "effective" any day but I will prefer and encourage "more effective" approaches if available.

I used this method recently towards a dangerous source and I would say it was very effective.

However, I also engaged this source with a fair bit of ad hominem and personal attacks prior to making a detailed case against him.

In any case, I would hope people would take into account the objective / factual evidence rather than dismiss the argument because they feel the authors use of ad hominem / personal attacks weakens their case.

In this thread, the evidence CBS presented is the core of his case, not the ad hominem 'attacks'. Since he is providing evidence for his arguments, I don't feel the use of ad hominem makes his case any weaker or the impact of his speech any less effective.

 

[brutus79]

We don't need gloves for this one. Sworder came out of the woods because he has an agenda. It won't be too long before we know what that is. He is methodically attacking tests, people ( you know the circle jerk) and all of a sudden expert in brewing and telling people how easy it is. You know what's next. He has a solid hook up ) just a pm will get you set up. Only rule. don't labmax your raws lmfao

Amen.

 

[brutus79]

Do you honestly disagree with my efforts to reduce personal attacks, insults and name-calling in order to facilitate more productive discussion? Do you think more personal attacks, insults and name-calling will promote more productive discussion?

It's not about encouraging people to be nicer or more polite as you suggest. Some of the most productive debates are also have some of the most intense, passionate and ruthless participants. It is about reducing the ad hominem attacks that usually derail debates.

As much as I personally like @CensoredBoardsSuck and appreciate his critical-thinking skills, insight and extensive contributions to the forum, I will stand by principle. It has always served me well to consistently operate the forum by principle rather than give anyone special treatment.

I share a passion for free speech with @CensoredBoardsSuck and empathize with his frustrations at being the target of criticism and disagreement. But he knows very well that this comes with the territory of an uncensored forum. It is exhausting but necessary for free-spirited debate. I sincerely hope to see and welcome his return. This doesn't mean I have to agree with him on everything.

You could have accomplished the same thing with a pm instead of publicy admonishing him. All it did was give ammunition to those who he does battle with that exist to weaken the membership and scam the masses. I felt it undermined his true purpose here and although he and doc have peppered threads with a banter that may have been less than constructive I believe it would have worked itself out sooner than later without intervention.

 

[brutus79]

I don't disagree with the goal of wanting to reduce personal attacks and insults.

However, I don't necessarily feel that admonishing members for their behavior in such a specific way was the ideal way to do it.

It just felt too hamfisted. Maybe I'm not looking at it objectively enough, I will concede to that if you feel that is the case.

Do I personally feel that personal attacks, ad-hominem, insults, etc is the most productive way to discuss something?

No. But It seems that many Meso members were big fans of this approach when it comes to the steroid underground or when dealing with scammers. I feel that based on what I've observed in the Underground that it is effective when dealing with bad actors, scammers, and liars - to an extent.

My statement about people wanting a 'nicer' or more polite Meso was not directed at you, but rather other members who have recently decided to deplore the antics they once enjoyed and took part in for the longest time. Now it seems like these individuals would choose politeness over fearless criticism and critical thinking.

Ha! We both used the word admonish. Great word and my apologies to all for not finishing the thread before responding. Although eloquent it is now redundant.

 

[MANWHORE]

Weighted chin up likes Brutus' post
that's a shocker

 

[MANWHORE]

let me get my dictionary out we could all use some big words.. that should make us all sound like we know what we're talking about..

Brutus don't you have a family to take care of how do you have so much time on the board?
I'm not even joking why don't you go live a real life

 

[weighted chinup]

Weighted chin up likes Brutus' post
that's a shocker

Wow, such insight! Maybe we are the same person using multiple handles! I know you like accusing people who are critical of you of doing that.

Crawl back into your dingy burrow and start making some more of your toilet brew. You have cycles to ruin and people to rip off.

I'm not even joking why don't you go live a real life

You barely make a living wage so you resort to selling gear in the most dangerous and unsafe way possible, and you're calling out other people?

And another thing, why do you type like a fucking idiot? Are you posting from a flip phone from the early 2000's? Did you have a large portion of your brain removed due to bacterial meningitis you got from eating strange asshole?

If I have to read, another
post with shitty, syntax
and improper, use of commas....I'll
probably, have an, anuersym.

W

 

[MANWHORE]

5 of you go to the same gym.
talk about the board on the way to the gym
in the gym
on the way home from the gym.. don't you think that's sad

And every time you and your Troll friends
talk bad about me, you get me more customers..

Brutus, if I knew that was the plan,
we could have went over it in PM first.. I feel bad now leaving you out..

Booted from one board already, and the
only reason you guys are still here, is because Millard allows it..

A bunch of trolls
2 shills
and 1 mentally challenged individual .. The Soured Cream Team .. Nice

M signing out..
Off to the flea market for some Nunchuks

 

[Millard]

You could have accomplished the same thing with a pm instead of publicy admonishing him. All it did was give ammunition to those who he does battle with that exist to weaken the membership and scam the masses. I felt it undermined his true purpose here and although he and doc have peppered threads with a banter that may have been less than constructive I believe it would have worked itself out sooner than later without intervention.

It is the personal attacks, insults and name-calling provides itself that provides plenty of ammunition. I strongly disagree with the suggestion that calling out this type of behavior undermines anything. On the contrary, if it were reduced, then the opponents would have much less ammunition.

I also disagree with the suggestion that a PM would have been more appropriate than a public discussion. In my experience, PMs are less effective because many members tend to spend most of the time pointing fingers and I spend most of my time reassuring them that I am not taking sides. If anyone becomes upset, resentful or has their feelings hurt, they often publicly display their own version of events anyway. I much prefer to discuss these things publicly in the first place so that everyone can see exactly what transpired.

 

[MANWHORE]

big bro Johnny ballz has a point !!!! That's a stand up man right there!!

Who are you, again?

 

[Docd187123]

I am one of the members who was supposedly "admonished". I couldn't care less that. Millard did it publicly. It's better he did it publicly IMO than privately via PM bc what is there to hide? He SIMPLY asked for personal insults to be kept at minimum or stopped. Why that's difficult I have no idea. And if you go back and look, you will see the "admonishment" was towards both of us and there's no need to twist Millard's words

I will tell you right now that I am a dog with a piece of meat in his mouth when it comes to things like this, that is I would not have stopped until I got bored with it. It would have spilled over I to countless more threads, derailed more topics, etc. Trust me when I tell you this, it would never have worked itself out without someone doing something. CBS stated doing so this way will cause resentment between us. I guarantee you it will not. I will go so far as to apologize to CBS for my childish behavior. So CBS I apologize for acting like a child in many ways to you. I believe in what i have argued for and against but the need for insulting remarks did nothing to strengthen my argument.

 

[Millard]

In this case though, I would say that both participants are well aware of the argument to be made in favor of a more productive dialogue. But both participants still engaged each other in a way that one might consider to be 'counter-productive' or inefficient.

That is partly why I feel such a specific 'call-out' to two members in this particular dispute wasn't the ideal approach. I personally don't feel it would have any positive effects on the course of the discussion given that both members are intelligent and understand the argument in favor of a more productive dialogue.

This is exactly the reason I felt it was the most appropriate time to make a statement. My frustration with this situation was a big factor.