The MJ Forum Accident.

[nitroburn]

Woah Woah!

The MJ Forum was a hasty little thing and I NEVER intended it to just pop on here like that. I am that nasty little bugger who had the idiotic idea that possibly MJ was an enthogen worthy of a little respect and its own place in the garden. I am not the one who created the forum though. (for those who are quick to blame the growing pains on me.) But it was rather a misunderstanding.

Yes! You are all correct about the discussion of the Marijuana forum happening on the chat. Much happens on the chat. Most of the main administrators have used the chat for the past years to communicate and keep SPF alive. If it wasn't for the chat, this place proably would have come together a whole lot slower. That doesn't justify the decision being made only on the chat though, and it was never ment to be made only the chat.

There was a discussion on it that somehow led to it being created which surpised even me. I would not have created the actual forum because I know the reservations people here have about it.

I'm no long an administrator here and will journey back to just hosting the chat. I'm sorry my intentions were misunderstood, i wished to raise only conversation on the topic.

It really hurt me to see LW even suggest leaving to start a new forum. LW's opinion is held in the upmost respect by myself.

So before you can leave LW just understand the only person to blame on this is Me. I brought up the idea, and even though I didn't make the forum, I feel responsible for the degregation of relations between you and and people here that it has caused.

-
one last thing,
all this legal stuff.
Its pretty wishful thinking to think spf is anywhere near Erowid, Overgrow, Shroomery, Hive, Rhodium, etc... on the list of sites to bust promoting drug use. Hell, we don't even allow anyone to say things like, "I grew this huge crop of weed/mushrooms/etc" or "heres how to make some awesome hash/mushroom tea". Has anyone been to any of those other sites in the past years? Why have they not been busted, i would think they would be first in line before us.

(i in no way ment for anything here to come off in a negative manner)

But if you are really that concerned, help write the disclamer ASAP!!!!

Key issues to address include:

Age of the participant: Covers whether you allow minors to participate in your Web site.

Assent and opt out: Covers how assent is made, the legal responsibilities that flow from assent, and the opportunity to opt out if the individual does not wish to be bound by the agreement.

Children: New laws exist for addressing collecting information regarding children. Define, if appropriate, the terms, conditions and processes for complying with laws regarding children's participation in Web sites.

Civil rights: Covers types of conduct on the Web site that would violate other individuals' civil rights.

Contracting: Covers when the agreement regarding participating on this Web site becomes binding and to what extent.

Copyrights, trademarks and restrictions on use: Define copyrights and trademarks that are contained on the Web site and define them as your intellectual property. Define the scope and/or limits of how information from the site can or cannot be used.

Criminal investigation: Define under what conditions information is released for criminal investigations.

Damages: Usually, this area would address limits on damages or it would require waiving damages to some degree by both parties. Limitations on damages usually are defined as purchase price or replacement cost. Information (even if it is free) usually is provided "as is" with no warranties.

Due process: If the activity on the Web site can result in revoking benefits for which a property right exists, then provide how the individual's due process rights are maintained before revoking those property rights.

Electronic signatures and records: Define whether electronic signatures and records can be used in court disputes.

Fraud: Define under what conditions it is fraudulent to present erroneous information. Users must be warned of the criminal consequences of not being truthful at a federal Web site.

Freedom of Information Act: Provide information about how to submit a FOIA request and/or conditions when FOIA requests are inappropriate. The user agreement cannot change the law in this matter.

Indemnification: Define under what conditions, if any, the participant agrees to indemnify the federal agency.

Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction is global unless limited by a specific statement as to where claims can be filed. Usually, Web sites limit jurisdiction to the courts in which the Web site is physically located. At a minimum, define jurisdiction as a U.S. court. If you have a personal Web site, define jurisdiction as your local courts for the district of whatever state you are in. Provide an "opt out" if the individual chooses not to agree.

Limits on liability: Define whether the agency Web site is a distributor (minimal liability for content) or publisher (significant liability for content).

Links: Provide a disclaimer for endorsements when linking to other Web sites.

Ownership and use: Define ownership and use of any information users provide to the Web site.

Privacy: In compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974, a privacy notice must be provided. The notice must include the degree to which private information will be shared or not shared.

Prohibited conduct: This will be a list of prohibited conduct that addresses topics such as advertisements and promotions, civil rights, encrypted files (for example, posting of encrypted files), gambling, intellectual property, libel, political activity, pornography, privacy, slander, viruses and other conduct issues.

Purpose: Define the dialogue that is the purpose of this Web site. Individuals or organizations can be blocked if they deviate repeatedly.

Records management. State whether records are stored and for how long (mainly a privacy issue).

"Savings" clause: States that if one section is unenforceable, the other sections survive.

Security: Defines the types of activity that would lead to criminal prosecution or being blocked from the Web site.

Spam: Defines under what conditions an e-mail name, TCP/IP address or domain can be blocked.

Torts: Actions that might lead to damages. For instance, using your Web site to spam other Web sites might be considered trespass.

Viruses: Set liability limits for when the public or the agency inadvertently introduces computer viruses or other damaging software.

Warranties: Define to what level, if at all, you are providing warranties. Generally, information content is used "as is" with no warranty.

[winder]

The place COULD have an MJ forum.  However, it may bring more trouble than pleasure as a result.  And it is hard to unring the bell.  That is, once the MJ forum is running along and others find it, there will be diffficulties whipping people into line (if the old lines, such as no self incrimination apply) or in deciding that the forum was a mistake so it is cancelled with many posts losts and people crying censorship.

Incremental change, even at a board such as this one, is easier to move with, rather than radical change.

If radical change is what is sought, then maybe we wouldn't be here, but elsewhere trying to find that change.

I would not leave on account of a MJ forum.
But then again, I wouldn't have much to add to it either.

[CJ]

I didn`t read your whole rap there Nitroburn. I Didn`t bother cause I`m a rather minor player,and yet have some set ideas. One is that you are another person I know of,who has done a tremendous amount for SPF. You prolly deserve a lot more credit than you are recieving for it`s present existance. And I always got a kick out of your 'puffing for peace' That`s cool.

     And on a personal level,I do believe like you, that cannabis is an ethneogen.

     But there are problems,and the situation has it`s own action,and screwed up side,without even involving SPF. I know it sounds chckens...t, but sometimes, it`s really not worth going there. And for many, it does violate what they think SPF stands for..

     LW,feelings aside,I think is wise in this, but in a side situation I have no play in,I am sorry for the hurt. I`m just a member who feels he can get to say a few things. I respect  people,like you, who have put out total over the years.

Just to finish,this'how far to go' back and forth rears it`s ugly head from time to time, and it would be far wiser to just survive and hold the faith for the moment. We don`t want factions.

[loki]

//http://www.spiritplants.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=125

Let's please make the decisions consensual, rather than not do things because of some objections. Not everyone is conservative here, and as I have also said, if there is no forum for it here then members must go elsewhere to discuss it, which does nothing for group unity. I already suggested in another thread that the forum could be invite only and hidden from the public, and that would solve all the problems that objectors bring up, while permitting those interested and worthy of giving the say the freedom to do so.

go to the thread i linked above and put in your nominations for executive team members so that we can give these worthy people a proper mandate for their action.