DorothyZbornak
Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Messages
- 285
- Status
D
DGSB0708
Guest
Being honest, hard to tell sometimes... you post so much all over the place you are kind of hard to follow sometimes. Not rippin' just voicing my personal opinion. I know it says you have been on here for a long time, but the vast majority of your posts I believe have been in the last month or so. JB / H volunteer to do this stuff. Busting balls on something that certainly sounds to be a serious matter, likely not the best way to go, even if you are a serial ball buster. No disrespect meant. S-
DorothyZbornak
Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Messages
- 285
DGSB has a point - sarcasm is difficult to pick up on a forum at times. What you typed above doesn't really seem very sarcastic or 'ball-busting-like.'. Like DGSB, I am not trying to rip on you, just trying to make a point. You've mentioned a couple of times that we all turn your words around on you and whatnot but if it keeps happening, I don't think that it is just us, you know? It could be you.
I'll admit, I am guilty of re-reading and editing my posts a billion times before actually clicking the 'Post' button - but I think that it is worth it in the end not to have people take my words out of context or to take offense to something that I didn't actually mean.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
MODERATOR UPDATE
To begin, I'd like to apologize to our members for the brief delay in the issuance of this statement regarding Ploop and his status here on DBG. The situation unfolded late in the day yesterday, and into the evening, and with family commitments, it simply became too late last night for me to compose a proper statement that would meet my personal standards. With that being said, the situation is as follows:
There have been several issues regarding this vendor for some time now that have given Admin, Heisenberg and I cause for concern. The first, and most obvious, being the widely reported ill treatment of member customers. While not presenting sufficient reason to warrant action in and of itself, it was a situation that weighed somewhat heavily on our minds, given our role as "guardians" of the community, so to speak, and given that our duty, first and foremost, is the protection of the board, it's culture and our members. Simply put, in our minds, there was no place for such treatment of members here at DBG, but from a rules standpoint, this increasingly untenable situation didn't present us with many options in terms of corrective action.
This brings me to the second issue, which is that there had been growing suspicions on our part for a period of months now that "Ploop" was not simply a vendor who had been introduced to DBG by a fellow member, but rather, that very member themselves. The specifics of these suspicions are not important for purposes of this statement, nor in general, but suffice it to say that they were significant and difficult to ignore. Among them was the fact that immediately following any remotely negative feedback post regarding Ploop, the member who introduced this vendor to our board would come to Ploop's defense in what seemed an unusually assertive manner. Again, however, while increasingly untenable, this fact, in and of itself, did not present sufficient cause for corrective action, but did add to our growing concerns.
With all of the above being the "back story", that leads me to the turning point in this situation, which occurred yesterday afternoon. Heisenberg and I were presented with irrefutable evidence that Ploop was, in fact GDX, the member who introduced "Ploop" to DBG. This evidence came in the form of information pertaining to Ploop's packaging and one specific component thereof, which I won't mention in open forum for the safety and security of any member who might have an outstanding order in transit from Ploop. The bottom line is that the evidence presented to us verified beyond any reasonable doubt what we had suspected for some time, which was that GDX was in fact Ploop, which clearly and distinctly violates Admin's rightfully strict rule prohibiting members from actively selling products on DBG. As a result, GDX has been banned from DBG, and "Ploop's" thread will be removed from the board following a one week period to allow members sufficient time to review this final update on his status.
I'd like to take this opportunity to briefly explain the significance of the rule that prohibits members from selling products here on DBG. As many of your know, Silk Road was recently shut down (although reportedly it has been relaunched, at least for now) by the US government for its activities in operating an "open air market" for illicit products. Communities like DBG rely solely on First Amendment protections in order to remain in existence, and those protections ONLY work when we exist as a venue for the exchange of information and as a social community. When the line is crossed from information exchange and social community to active, open marketplace, the First Amendment has no ability to protect us, and the board, it's staff and it's members, become potentially complicit in a number of different crimes under US law. As a result, it is absolutely imperative that NO member be allowed to actively sell and function as a vendor here on DBG while also belonging to the board as a general member. This clearly creates a conspiracy argument under US criminal code, and puts all of us at risk. For this specific reason, we are extremely proactive in enforcing this rule, and as a result, swift and decisive action was taken in Ploop's situation, once the indisputable evidence was made available to us.
For anyone who may not yet completely understand the policy and how it functions, I'll offer HydreauxMan as an example. When arriving here at DBG, he reached out to me and asked where he could post his information and introduce himself to the board. I explained to him at that time that general members were NOT permitted to operate as vendors on DBG, and that while we welcomed new email vendors, in order to establish a thread, he would have to either be introduced to the board by an existing customer and board member and have no direct, personal interaction on the forums, or, should he desire to have the ability to post, he would have to contact Admin and request a vendor membership account, which is what he ultimately chose to do. Even in the case of a transparent vendor account, the vendor's posting ability is limited to answering questions posted by members in that vendor's thread only. No "specials" can be posted, nor any other form of advertising, as this once again puts us at risk of being deemed as a "marketplace" instead of an information exchange community. While there's certainly a fine line that must be walked with vendor accounts, Admin, Heisenberg and I feel that allowing vendor access to their threads on a tightly regulated basis offers both members and vendors a great many potential benefits, and it's our hope that more vendors will avail themselves of this opportunity in the future. In any event, HydreauxMan serves as an excellent case study in how vendors should introduce themselves to the community, and, subsequently, how they should conduct themselves after the initial introduction. His pro-active desire to operate within the rules of our community demonstrates both a sincere desire to serve our members, as well as a level of intelligence and understanding where legal protections and ultimate longevity are concerned. It's this type of vendor that we welcome with open arms here at DBG, and that we hope to attract going forward BECAUSE of our well thought out rules and standards, not in spite of them.
In conclusion, while this wasn't a particularly difficult decision to reach from a technical and rules standpoint, it was not one that was made lightly, as I know that a number of members rely on Ploop's services to meet their medical needs. Please know that this fact was taken into consideration, and that ultimately, this decision was made for the safety and well being of all members, and was one that simply had to be made. I do know that Ploop has a thread presence elsewhere on the internet, and I would certainly presume that he will remain in business, despite not having a presence here on DBG. As a result, I'm confident that anyone who relies on Ploop's services will still have the ability to reach him, and to obtain current information on his status, should they so desire. As someone who has spent a great deal of time searching for high quality vendors with a potential interest in serving our members, I'm sincerely disappointed that Ploop's presence here on DBG had to end in this manner, as it was, quite simply, unnecessary. GDX was confronted on several occasions about this situation, either directly or indirectly, and the vendor account policy and process has been well documented via HydreauxMan's introduction to DBG, as well as other related open forum discussions, so there was ample opportunity to step forward, admit that his situation here on the board was in violation of our stated policies and rules, and to submit a request to Admin to become compliant in this regard. Had he chosen to do so, he, in all likelihood, would still be a vendor in good standing here on DBG. Unfortunately for all concerned, he chose not to do so.
Thank you for your patience and time, and I look forward to bringing you new, more positive updates in the days and weeks to come. Have a great weekend everyone.....
Jewbacca
To begin, I'd like to apologize to our members for the brief delay in the issuance of this statement regarding Ploop and his status here on DBG. The situation unfolded late in the day yesterday, and into the evening, and with family commitments, it simply became too late last night for me to compose a proper statement that would meet my personal standards. With that being said, the situation is as follows:
There have been several issues regarding this vendor for some time now that have given Admin, Heisenberg and I cause for concern. The first, and most obvious, being the widely reported ill treatment of member customers. While not presenting sufficient reason to warrant action in and of itself, it was a situation that weighed somewhat heavily on our minds, given our role as "guardians" of the community, so to speak, and given that our duty, first and foremost, is the protection of the board, it's culture and our members. Simply put, in our minds, there was no place for such treatment of members here at DBG, but from a rules standpoint, this increasingly untenable situation didn't present us with many options in terms of corrective action.
This brings me to the second issue, which is that there had been growing suspicions on our part for a period of months now that "Ploop" was not simply a vendor who had been introduced to DBG by a fellow member, but rather, that very member themselves. The specifics of these suspicions are not important for purposes of this statement, nor in general, but suffice it to say that they were significant and difficult to ignore. Among them was the fact that immediately following any remotely negative feedback post regarding Ploop, the member who introduced this vendor to our board would come to Ploop's defense in what seemed an unusually assertive manner. Again, however, while increasingly untenable, this fact, in and of itself, did not present sufficient cause for corrective action, but did add to our growing concerns.
With all of the above being the "back story", that leads me to the turning point in this situation, which occurred yesterday afternoon. Heisenberg and I were presented with irrefutable evidence that Ploop was, in fact GDX, the member who introduced "Ploop" to DBG. This evidence came in the form of information pertaining to Ploop's packaging and one specific component thereof, which I won't mention in open forum for the safety and security of any member who might have an outstanding order in transit from Ploop. The bottom line is that the evidence presented to us verified beyond any reasonable doubt what we had suspected for some time, which was that GDX was in fact Ploop, which clearly and distinctly violates Admin's rightfully strict rule prohibiting members from actively selling products on DBG. As a result, GDX has been banned from DBG, and "Ploop's" thread will be removed from the board following a one week period to allow members sufficient time to review this final update on his status.
I'd like to take this opportunity to briefly explain the significance of the rule that prohibits members from selling products here on DBG. As many of your know, Silk Road was recently shut down (although reportedly it has been relaunched, at least for now) by the US government for its activities in operating an "open air market" for illicit products. Communities like DBG rely solely on First Amendment protections in order to remain in existence, and those protections ONLY work when we exist as a venue for the exchange of information and as a social community. When the line is crossed from information exchange and social community to active, open marketplace, the First Amendment has no ability to protect us, and the board, it's staff and it's members, become potentially complicit in a number of different crimes under US law. As a result, it is absolutely imperative that NO member be allowed to actively sell and function as a vendor here on DBG while also belonging to the board as a general member. This clearly creates a conspiracy argument under US criminal code, and puts all of us at risk. For this specific reason, we are extremely proactive in enforcing this rule, and as a result, swift and decisive action was taken in Ploop's situation, once the indisputable evidence was made available to us.
For anyone who may not yet completely understand the policy and how it functions, I'll offer HydreauxMan as an example. When arriving here at DBG, he reached out to me and asked where he could post his information and introduce himself to the board. I explained to him at that time that general members were NOT permitted to operate as vendors on DBG, and that while we welcomed new email vendors, in order to establish a thread, he would have to either be introduced to the board by an existing customer and board member and have no direct, personal interaction on the forums, or, should he desire to have the ability to post, he would have to contact Admin and request a vendor membership account, which is what he ultimately chose to do. Even in the case of a transparent vendor account, the vendor's posting ability is limited to answering questions posted by members in that vendor's thread only. No "specials" can be posted, nor any other form of advertising, as this once again puts us at risk of being deemed as a "marketplace" instead of an information exchange community. While there's certainly a fine line that must be walked with vendor accounts, Admin, Heisenberg and I feel that allowing vendor access to their threads on a tightly regulated basis offers both members and vendors a great many potential benefits, and it's our hope that more vendors will avail themselves of this opportunity in the future. In any event, HydreauxMan serves as an excellent case study in how vendors should introduce themselves to the community, and, subsequently, how they should conduct themselves after the initial introduction. His pro-active desire to operate within the rules of our community demonstrates both a sincere desire to serve our members, as well as a level of intelligence and understanding where legal protections and ultimate longevity are concerned. It's this type of vendor that we welcome with open arms here at DBG, and that we hope to attract going forward BECAUSE of our well thought out rules and standards, not in spite of them.
In conclusion, while this wasn't a particularly difficult decision to reach from a technical and rules standpoint, it was not one that was made lightly, as I know that a number of members rely on Ploop's services to meet their medical needs. Please know that this fact was taken into consideration, and that ultimately, this decision was made for the safety and well being of all members, and was one that simply had to be made. I do know that Ploop has a thread presence elsewhere on the internet, and I would certainly presume that he will remain in business, despite not having a presence here on DBG. As a result, I'm confident that anyone who relies on Ploop's services will still have the ability to reach him, and to obtain current information on his status, should they so desire. As someone who has spent a great deal of time searching for high quality vendors with a potential interest in serving our members, I'm sincerely disappointed that Ploop's presence here on DBG had to end in this manner, as it was, quite simply, unnecessary. GDX was confronted on several occasions about this situation, either directly or indirectly, and the vendor account policy and process has been well documented via HydreauxMan's introduction to DBG, as well as other related open forum discussions, so there was ample opportunity to step forward, admit that his situation here on the board was in violation of our stated policies and rules, and to submit a request to Admin to become compliant in this regard. Had he chosen to do so, he, in all likelihood, would still be a vendor in good standing here on DBG. Unfortunately for all concerned, he chose not to do so.
Thank you for your patience and time, and I look forward to bringing you new, more positive updates in the days and weeks to come. Have a great weekend everyone.....
Jewbacca
Last edited by a moderator:
Heisenberg / HNB
Fool
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
- Messages
- 0
Due to a concerning shoutbox post regarding this vendor, Jewy and I have decided it fair to our members to reopen this thread briefly, so members can report back on any outstanding orders, and/or any problems or issues they may be experiencing.
Vendor contact info has been removed from the thread, members are not to post or share that info.
We will leave this thread open for discussion until Friday afternoon, then it will be gone forever.
Vendor contact info has been removed from the thread, members are not to post or share that info.
We will leave this thread open for discussion until Friday afternoon, then it will be gone forever.
Citylife
Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2012
- Messages
- 313
Never made an order with this guy but kinda glad this happened... I mean kicking him out and not him effing over any members with orders...
I saw on his list in our first communication he had some odd drugs that an IOP would never have and when I asked if he could get me a stronger PK he blew up on me and called me something along the lines of an "pathetic addict".... let's just say my next message back was not so nice and that was the end of "us" so to say!
I saw on his list in our first communication he had some odd drugs that an IOP would never have and when I asked if he could get me a stronger PK he blew up on me and called me something along the lines of an "pathetic addict".... let's just say my next message back was not so nice and that was the end of "us" so to say!
Last edited by a moderator:
Z
ZeroZia
Guest
I'm curious how many people who are below the 50 post requirement who are having troubles with Ploop. I haven't posted any orders with him because of this whole snafu. Perhaps it would be better to move him from this section and into the Blacklist so that people can have a heads up. After all isn't that why this forum exists?
D
DGSB0708
Guest
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
Those members with fewer than 50 posts can view this section and thread, but simply cannot post here. As a result, the information is available to them as well.
Z
ZeroZia
Guest
Jewy, I was saying that it would be interesting to see if those members are experiencing trouble with him. Because obviously some people are having trouble with orders and I'm curious if the larger member base is or is not.
I am curious why this isn't moving to the blacklist. I read your statement and I understand the nature of the problem, but I do think that maintaining a record of the instances at hand would be a good thing.
I am curious why this isn't moving to the blacklist. I read your statement and I understand the nature of the problem, but I do think that maintaining a record of the instances at hand would be a good thing.
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
I understand, and I believe that I may have misunderstood your reference to giving lower post count members a "heads up". In any event, your point is well taken, and I will continue to discuss and re-evaluate the matter with Heisenberg and Admin. I can certainly see a rationale for keeping the thread intact in the blacklist section, but there are some other factors at play here beyond archival considerations that must be taken into account as well, given all of the circumstances involved. Until a few outstanding issues are clarified and / or resolved, I'd rather not go into greater depth for the protection of members. Please know that I have my reasons, and that I share your concerns for members who may have outstanding business with this vendor, hence the thread having been re-opened. It's certainly conceivable that this thread could ultimately be left intact in the blacklist section, but at this moment, it's just too early to tell whether that will be the appropriate decision. Heisenberg and I will continue monitoring the situation, and will update everyone as appropriate.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
I think that ZZ's recommendation is centered around the fact that members with fewer than 50 posts are unable to speak to their personal experiences with this thread in the email section, whereas they would be able to if the thread were moved to the blacklist section, which has no post count minimum required to post therein. So, in that sense, moving the thread would make a difference. Of course, how long the thread remained there, or here for that matter, is a separate matter entirely.hooter1 said:
Heisenberg / HNB
Fool
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
- Messages
- 0
As mentioned, this thread was re-opened temporarily for members to discuss any current outstanding orders or any issues that they may be having. Not to discuss future thread placement. That decision is up to Admin, Jewbacca, and me.
Last edited by a moderator:
Z
ZeroZia
Guest
H, I didn't say that the decision was in my hands. I'm sure you guys will do what you feel is right considering the circumstances at hand.
Just as a quick side thought. I would like to shot a PM to Jewy and I was curious if you could do that because it says I do not have permission because we are not friends. Is there a way to remedy that?
Just as a quick side thought. I would like to shot a PM to Jewy and I was curious if you could do that because it says I do not have permission because we are not friends. Is there a way to remedy that?
Last edited:
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
Try again. Apparently enabling profile security also limits inbound PM's to friends only. Wasn't aware of that until now.
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
Interesting. Not sure what the software developers intended with that particularly feature, but apparently you're right, given your test with KK, and the fact that once I turned off profile security, ZZ was able to PM me. Good catch. I'd have never thought that it only applied to staff level accounts.hooter1 said:
Jewbacca
GRAND SCAMMER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 0
Thanks for the update SJ. If there is anyone following this thread who has NOT received a paid order, please either post your present status if you feel comfortable doing so, or PM me if you prefer. We would like to bring this matter to a close as quickly as possible for the best interests of all concerned, but also want to provide members with an opportunity to be heard, should they be experiencing any order difficulties.
Thanks for your assistance.....
K
kicksandkush
Guest
All is well on my end with my order.
- Status
-
@
iamgroot:
replied you already
-
@
iamgroot:
are you talking about me? lol
-
@
Diz-E:
@ I am Groot--I emailed ya bro, Diz-E
-
@
SeaDonkey:
@LatsDoodis by tonight I meant like 16 hours from now, so you still have a chance!
-
@
LatsDoodis:
@SeaDonkey ooh, I just got home, too, but Iit was raining here all of a sudden! How was it?
-
@
SeaDonkey:
Anyone else gonna watch the lunar eclipse tonight
- S @ scarred14: @RussianRambo who did?
-
@
xenxra:
what the fudge
- R @ RussianRambo: he set up a controlled delivery on 2 people
- R @ RussianRambo: Slaughter AKA Slaughterhouse is no good anymore
- R @ RussianRambo: coolchems no good
-
@
hiTillidie:
Just yankin your lobe jason...once paid you should have privleges.
-
@
hiTillidie:
You gotta buy vendor coupons first...
- J @ jason1974: How do i access approved vendors now that i am a member?
-
@
xenxra:
@jason1974 every single time someone pops up with that handle, they're a scammer. my browser gives me a security warning for their site.
-
@
hiTillidie:
Coolchems is no good
-
@
hiTillidie:
Xenxra yeah fir sure.pigpredictable
- J @ jason1974: Can anybody vouch for Coolchems.com?
- J @ jason1974: Can anybody vouch for Coolchems.com?
- R @ Rx4health: Have a Good Day Everyone & God Bless You All.. !!