Shady vendors and Salvia movies

[Vertigo6911]

Hi, i would like to atract your attention to the following:

there are these 2 vendors that are using videos of people tripping in salvia as a marketing gimmick.

heres the topic on shroomery.org:

http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.p...285#Post4880108

and for those of you who arent regged at shroomery.org, here is the email dialog ive had with the proprietor of this site: http://www.moondreams.net/index.php?main_page=media_library who as it turns out claims to be the chick in the video.

heres the emails:

me:

I would like to express my utter contrmpt with your attempts at marketing

Salvia divinorum as a 'party drug'. the movies are highly deceptive and have

nothing of content to offer some1 who is truely interested in lerning more

about S. divinorum.

also u should understand that the only people who will take these videos on

a positive note are the people who were interested to start with.

anyone not familiar with altered conciousness will take nothing but negative

impressions from them and this short term gain strategy is contributing to

the efforts of the uninformed to outlaw this and other substances.

oh and btw, could you guys try to find people who dont look and act like

total wretched junkies for these clips???

seeing how you treat the product is a dead giveaway to the fact that you

have contempt for your own customers.

in short, your showing all the worst signs of both shady drugdealers and the

gung ho drug war agencies, knock it off!

her:

Shut the fuck up, ok? If you weren't interested in drugs yourself you

wouldn't even be on my website. I'm really sick of you salvia freaks who

are so worried about your precious secret being found out and taken away

from you. I actually have something to lose if it becomes illegal and I

don't give a shit because I'm not so into drugs that I have to take the time

to write to people begging them to stop making a big deal out of it. Salvia

and what it does have been around a lot longer than we have, and if it's

going to be made illegal, then it certainly won't be because of us. Your

fucked up government will take anything and everything away from you

eventually, so just enjoy it while you can and vote green party if you want

to keep your damn rights. Also, if you don't want to look like a loser

yourself, try using proper spelling.

Very sincerely,

Sharry

me again:

yes that certainly sounds like someone who is moraly at peace with his

actions...

seriously, your trying to sell salvia as something it's not and that damages

everyone.

your creating demand where it should not exist and you misrepresentation of

salvia

is quite capable of resulting in serious emotional trauma when used by

someone who

has not been exposed to some factual information.

im not worried about salvia being taken away from me, i never even took it

myself.

im worried about your greedy stumbling in the dark resulting in yet another

layer of contempt

between sober and non sober people, you are not just greedy, your holding

back the evolution of mankind.

your need to point out spelling errors comes from an inability to insult me

based on content

and utterly reveals your contempt for your own customers.

im pointing that oout a 2nd time because it seems to be somewhat

inconsistant with what

your are supposed to be...

why are you doing this realy?

her again, using the old trick of awsnering a random obvious question, as opposed to the one i actualy asked:

>yes that certainly sounds like someone who is moraly at peace with >his actions...

that is a call that makes no sense concerning my reply to you.

seriously, your trying to sell salvia as something it's not and that damages

everyone.

>your creating demand where it should not exist and you >misrepresentation of salvia is quite capable of resulting in serious >emotional trauma when used by someone who has not been exposed to >some factual information.

First, how would you know if you’ve never tried it? Second, I encourage everyone to do their homework before they try it, and most people who want to try it have done their homework because they don’t want to get ripped off.

>im not worried about salvia being taken away from me, i never even >took it myself.

>im worried about your greedy stumbling in the dark resulting in yet >another layer of contempt between sober and non sober people, you >are not just greedy, your holding back the evolution of mankind.

How does the evolution of mankind fit in to this subject?

>your need to point out spelling errors comes from an inability to >insult me based on content and utterly reveals your contempt for >your own customers.

My need to point out your spelling errors comes from the disappointment that I find myself feeling every day that I learn that children are not only being deprived of a proper education, but even as they become adults, they still don’t care about their need to learn. Also, you can’t knowingly say that I have contempt for my customers because you obviously aren’t one of them or you would know that to be untrue. I am grateful to every one of my customers, and I believe most of them to be some of the nicest people there are. We exchange emails throughout our transactions, and I even send daily jokes to people who are anxiously waiting for their packages and are nervous about online business. We also stay in touch with them through the forum on many topics that have nothing to do with the website itself.

If you bothered to check out the website, you would notice that we do a lot more than sell salvia and pipes. We’re active in our community, support healthy living and earth friendly behavior. We’ve had numerous art shows, have registered people to vote in our shop, and even had a voting party for the people who actually got out and voted last term. We do all of this for nothing. NOTHING. On our vacation last week for our fourth year anniversary, Jim and I took some time to do short videos and interviews with people along the way concerning factory farming, and small communities that have been run over by Walmart. Unless you are a republican, then you should be able to appreciate all of this.

I know I don’t need to point all of this out to you, but if you had taken the time to actually look at our whole website and get to know us, then you wouldn’t have written to bitch at me in the first place.

>im pointing that oout a 2nd time because it seems to be somewhat

>inconsistant with what your are supposed to be...

>why are you doing this realy?

In the beginning I was doing it because I thought it was an interesting experience that should be explored. Salvia taps into a part of the brain that you don’t even realize could exist, and it poses a lot of questions. Now, I do it mostly because I do a lot of animal rescues, and it helps to pay the bills.

Honestly, I don’t have a lot of time to write back and forth, so please forgive me if you write again and I send back a much shorter letter.

and heres me acting a fool:

uknow, i think u have all the time in the world, seeing as your not truely a vendor.

tell me, how is it that another site had been using the same videos as a marketing tool,

using the same catchy catchphrases to completely misrepresent something u dont understand?

where do these videos come from exactly?

and exactly what is the problem with your online identity?

some of it seems to be missing...

as for spelling errors, they say nothing aboutany level of edjucation

or intelligence, they simply reveal my lack of patience with you.

also u should have figured out by now that english is not my native language,

so if u wanna keep dissing me ull have to prove u know more then the utter most simple one

on the planet.

oh and spellcheck does nothing to uphold the illusion of intelligence on your part.

dont think i dont know its there, i just dont give a damn and neither should you.

you dwell on spelling errors because it makes u feel superior, a need that would not have to be filled

were u not at some level afraid of being inferior.

as for evolution, what you are doing does nothing but fincrease the wedge between people on the various sides of the drug argument, and that is counter productive to the social evolution process.

but the u already knew that didnt u?

u say u have little time, but u already gave me more then u should have, why?

what kind of vendor acts like you do?

you are not what u apear to be, so what are you?

why are you doing this realy?

her again taking the high road:

I gave you more time than I should have because I thought for a half a second that you might be interested in learning that I am a person and not just someone doing something that pisses you off.

The other site that has those videos bought them from me because that is actually my husband and I doing those experiments. We did them because we had numerous questions from customers concerning salvia, so we decided to try it and give them an account of our first experience.

I did not figure out that English is not your native language because you use it very well, but I would think that you’d be able to spell “you” properly instead of using a “u” like a 12 year old. Using spell check is sometimes helpful to everyone, including myself, and it takes less than 30 seconds.

I don’t believe that I am superior to anyone…I simply have a problem with laziness. It takes minimal effort to spell correctly and use spell check for more difficult words…especially if you are trying to write an intelligent sounding letter, which is what I said to you the first time (basically).

It sounds to me as if you just want to continue letting off steam on me for anything random that you can hold on to because your arguments have become weak, and you’re moving off of the initial subject and onto more personal defenses. You can continue to be angry at me for whatever reasons you like. Because I’ve shared some of my personal life with you, and tried to be somewhat reasonable, and you still want to continue fighting, I can only assume that you are simply a closed minded person who will always hold strong to only one side of an argument. This will only hurt you in disagreements with people who you actually care for. This is not the voice of someone who thinks that she is superior; it is the voice of experience.

and me acting a fool who is trying to sound smart:

ahh i see, i guess i must have insulted you a bit there...

look, you guys look like hippies, you house looks more

like an amsterdam coffeeshop then an amsterdam coffeeshop.

dont u understand what kind of associations this is going to provoke in

the eyes of those who have only drug war propaganda to base their opinions on?

dont u understand that looking at a person tripping is scary as hell to someone who has never done it?

dont u see that u are creating an image for salvia that is not only false, but potentialy damaging?

are young curious people to believe this is about having a good time?

if you want to enlighten people u have to show more then one side of the story too, dont u think

a cleancut buisnessman having a bad trip is something we should also be aware of?

dont u see any onjection to this?

do you truly think 'drugs' are just about having fun?

if so i humbely beg you to do a google on a guy named Terrence McKenna

and listen to him talk of dmt and psilocybine and tell me that nothing is lost if we decide

to destroy this part of nature.

let me quote everyones favorite stand up comedian, Bill Hicks:

"...its not a war on drugs, its a war on personal freedom, please keep that in mind at all times..."

if you share my concern please post in the relevant forums and email the relevant websites in your favorites to alert them to this situation.

[mescalito]

Thanks for the laugh mate!

You'd think Sally would've kicked that ego in the arse LOL.

Check out this recent discussion on this forum vertigo6911 http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/inde...=tripping+video

[Green Osiris]

*sigh* I didn't think people abused and disrespected the SD journey this much. This wee Osiris is very uncomfortable in reading the above dialogue because it shows a side of ethnobot-humanity that isn't really intended to be associated with such a deep level of self discovery that Sal.D offers the true purveyor of journey......

Maybe it's an inevitable syndrome of the marketing hype, as an MJ substitute, that attracts the shallow.

[Torsten]

I actually really enjoyed the sensible discussion we had with Jim from moondreams in that other thread (mescalito's link), but it seems Sharry really hasn't quite 'got it'.

[wandjina]

IMO these videos have the potential to do for sd what Leary did for LSD.

[Torsten]

IMO these videos have the potential to do for sd what Leary did for LSD.

That's a loaded statement!! To many Leary was the person who brought acid to the people, to some of the more informed he was also the person who got it banned. This latter fact is often glossed over by the same rationale Jim used in the other thread about why his videos should stay in the public domain. Maybe someone should point that analogy out to them, but then again they might just feel vindicated if they belong to the camp that is ignorant of Leary's negative effect on LSD legality.

[wandjina]

That's a loaded statement!!

exactly

to some of the more informed he was also the person who got it banned. This latter fact is often glossed over by the same rationale Jim used in the other thread about why his videos should stay in the public domain. Maybe someone should point that analogy out to them, but then again they might just feel vindicated if they belong to the camp that is ignorant of Leary's negative effect on LSD legality.

heheh...I just happened to have done a thesis on this (which I'm about to submit, yippee!!!)

Now by 'some of the more informed', who are you referring to? I consider myself to be informed, having read literally hundreds of psychiatric and popular articles written at the time.

I dont think much of Leary's evangelical approach to LSD, certainly his actions were a major contributing factor in the illegalisation of LSD, but 'anti-leary' sentiment has sometimes become as dogmatic as some 'pro-leary' arguments that paint him as martyr and cultural hero. IMO the 'truth' is alot more complex and subtle, especially with reference to the drug's status within psychiatry.

In fact, the popularisation of LSD began long before leary in the 1950s, when it was the subject of many articles in the popular press(including a famous interview with cary grant) and two documentaries screened on national TV. Moreover, there were concerns within the psychiatric community regarding 'non-medical' use before the drug became associated with the counter culture. further, criticism of LSD psychotherapy also predates the antics of Leary/Alpert etal.

That said, relatively few people knew about LSD in 1960, but from 1963 onwards Leary's fervent proselytising, in tandem with increasingly lurid and sensationalist media coverage, helped publicise LSD and taint its reputation as a legitimate psychiatric drug and subject of scientific research.

However, there were forces 'internal' to American psychiatry that may have marginalised LSD even in the absense of controversy. In the years following WWII the discipline was dominated by the psychoanalytic tradition, however by the 1960s this came under attack from those who supported a 'biological' approach to mind/brain and mental illness that emphasised empiricism and phenomenology.

Interestingly, LSD actually gave the notion of a chemical mind, and endogenous neurotxins as the cause of mental illness, new impetus (the idea had been kicking around for yonks, e.g. Kraepelin, de Tours, Beringer).

many argue it started psychopharmacology, especially as a result of the discover that 5HT and LSD had analogous chemical structures. (hence 'model psychosis' and all that jazz)

Anyways...

Human experimentation with LSD, by the 1960s, had largely moved away from the psychotomimetic model and focused on the investigation of potential therapeutic applications, and in the U.S the psychedelic model was dominant. Although the 'external' social and political turmoil surrounding LSD (i.e. as a menace to the nations youth and social stability etc etc) influenced perspectives inside psychiatry, the discipline was also in a process of 'biomedicalising' itself, an aspect of which was the minimisation or expulsion of theory and practice not seen to be in line with the burgeonimg orthodoxy. (a process which had occurred several times before in the history of the field).

Because psychoanalysis was not amenable to the new standards of demonstrating empirical evidence of safety and efficacy, appeared to be based on metaphysical ideology, and eschewed 'modern' treatmenst such as psychopharmaceutical approaches(which had been discovered in the 1950s and had drastically altered asylum practice, especially the introdution of chlorpromazine), it eventually declined, and psychiatry reoriented itself towards biology. (of course, there were may other factors that fed into the contraction of psychoanalysis, including the 'economic restructuring'of the Nixon adminstration and professional competition from psychology etc).

The LSD therapies, being largely based in psychodynamic theory and practice, could be, and were, criticised for many of the same reasons. Methodologically they relied on case studies and small clinical trials, indeed, Hoffer and Osmond argued in 1967 against the application of randomly controlled trials. Secondly, the transcendental and 'mystical' properties attributed to LSD, although largely unchallenged when discussed in the 1950s, became increasingly unwelcome in a discipline that wanted to realign itslef with medical science

and move away from its image as unscientific and mired in Fruedian theory.

In sum, LSD therapies (i.e. human experimentation) may have been marginalised without Leary and external pressures assocu\iated with response to widespread use. LSD also appears to have catalysed this process, but a process that was already underway.

Lastly, I contend that if it wasn't leary, then it would have been someone else. There certainly were plenty of candidates, many people had access to LSD and distributed it to their friends and associates. There's always gonna be someone who is so fucken impressed with the effects of a psychdelic that they feel it their duty to 'spread the word', or paint themselves as some kinda messiah (i.e. High priest), or make a buck, or

all of the above, which is a shame. But that's humans for ya.

Although I have argued there are subtleties in the decline of LSDresearch, I think blaming everything on Leary is unfair (although not unwarrented). It is not an adequate explanation. He was a product of his time; also irresponsible,arrogant and deliberately provocative yes, ...but not the sole agent of the drug's 'downfall'. The picture is alot more grey than it is black and white IMO

[inpsyght]

.

Edited February 7, 2012 by inpsyght

[Torsten]

Now by 'some of the more informed', who are you referring to? I consider myself to be informed, having read literally hundreds of psychiatric and popular articles written at the time.

The large majority of people who know his name will only know that he supported LSD and was persecuted for it. Only few will delve deeper, which is who I meant. And then there are a handful who go overboard and do a thesis on it

I dont think much of Leary's evangelical approach to LSD, certainly his actions were a major contributing factor in the illegalisation of LSD, but 'anti-leary' sentiment has sometimes become as dogmatic as some 'pro-leary' arguments that paint him as martyr and cultural hero. IMO the 'truth' is alot more complex and subtle, especially with reference to the drug's status within psychiatry.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but just because a drug was not welcomed in psychiatry does not mean it would become heavily scheduled. Sure, the medical criticism of LSD was independent from what Leary did, but by that time he was on his own trip and was also somewhat indepedent from his prior profession.

Lastly, I contend that if it wasn't leary, then it would have been someone else. There certainly were plenty of candidates, many people had access to LSD and distributed it to their friends and associates. There's always gonna be someone who is so fucken impressed with the effects of a psychdelic that they feel it their duty to 'spread the word', or paint themselves as some kinda messiah (i.e. High priest), or make a buck, or all of the above, which is a shame. But that's humans for ya.

I certainly would not blame Leary for everything. And as you say, if it wasn't him then it would have been someone else. Most people want gurus and some people want to be gurus, so when both find each other it all falls into place. I just don't get the whole martyr status though in Leary's case. And one certainly has to question the motives of a psychiatry professor who gives recreational LSD to children.

The picture is alot more grey than it is black and white IMO

Certainly. I did not mean to blame Leary for everything and I am pretty sure I didn't say so either. However, we time and time again find individuals who want to push the boundaries too far which results in a backlash that affects all of us for years to come. It frustrates those who try and induce gradual change from within rather than revolutions that continually fail.

[wandjina]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but just because a drug was not welcomed in psychiatry does not mean it would become heavily scheduled

that wasn't at all what i meant, sorry, i should have been clearer...(perhaps i should also provide the title of my thesis: "Poison or Panacea? The Shifting Status of LSD in American Psychiatry"). Rather i was trying to point out that part of the reason why LSD was marginalised 'within' psychiatry was because of prexisting 'internal' professional dynamics (as opposed to Leary as scapegoat), whereas forces 'external' to psychiatry (social and political factors) presaged illegalisation (largely the consequence of concerns for widespread 'nonmedical' use/activites of leary et al./ media response etc). Put another way, I'm saying that on one level a distinction can be made between the legal and psychiatric status of the drug, that there are different causes for shifts in these statuses, although of course the two are not mutually exclusive.

And one certainly has to question the motives of a psychiatry professor who gives recreational LSD to children.

Yes, one would question his motives...but Leary was actually a clinical psychologist

[Torsten]

Yes, one would question his motives...but Leary was actually a clinical psychologist

LOL, yes thank you. Either way, he was educated enough to know better.

[Rev]

I dont think its really a bad thing Sally was banned

she spent 400 years underground, being known only by those who know and love here

then she was 'rediscovered' for a short period that allowed her to move beyond the one culture and geographic locale and across the world so that now there are plants on all habitable continents

there are likely to be more sally plants in existence right now than have ever existed in the past

shes here to stay

and those who seek her will find her

but i think its better underground for this plant where she wont be abused

like its growth preferences, its a survivor plant but it cant take full exposure

the plus side of pre-emptive scheduling is that sally will kind of fall off the radar

rare enough not to be recognisable, travelling slowly enough not to make pursuing her worth it for authorities

In fact if it were banned by the US tomorrow the plus side is that many countries where it is not yet found or traded alot would probably not bother to ban it - thus securing the right to use in privacy

i dont think this whole marekting thing has been bad. it has been essential in waking people up and then making channels for the plants seed and herb to get out there

if it hadnt would we ever have known about smoked sally 5X?

but now enough people have it and know it then it doesnt matter that its banned because its now ingrained

( i think this logic applies to kratom and other ethnobotanicals too, but not RC's and LSd which are not self perpetuating and home grown like plants)

Edited November 5, 2005 by Rev

[Amulte]

yes the situation is wrong man but do you honestly think you could change ones way of thinking and make them change their living via a few emails from a stranger? you seem an educated person may, why let somone like her bother you so?

i dont mean offence but it seams you put in too much time and got a little bizzare there man. dont let it bother you man, its sad but true but you cant change people. and that is what it looks like you were doing. i dont agree with her or what she is doing at all. but i feel your time could be better used than trying to change somones ideals, or even question them.

after saying all that, i look over what ive written and what i am doing myself here in this post. LOL. im doing the exact same thing. no need to reply buddy, i see your point.

LOL. but i gotta ask what you were tripping on in you last few emails to her? gettin into the sally yourself ay? LOL just kiddin.