Re:LSD: The Geek's Wonder Drug? (2006)
by anonbanker on Saturday January 24, 2015 @06:30PM
(#8941467)
That's right. Pretend the other three points not only didn't exist, but weren't directly contradictory to the point you quoted.
But I'll be down voted to oblivion for calling you a propagandist for doing things that propagandists do. So this is me not calling you one.
You are being downvoted for your ridiculously hostile tone.
Re:LSD: The Geek's Wonder Drug? (2006)
by anonbanker on Saturday January 24, 2015 @07:17PM
(#8941585)
Yeah, but you know the drill, I'm inviting the down votes. When I have conclusive data on what I'm working on here, you and Dang will definitely be the first to know.
Either way, thank you for the commentary. There have been times I actually didn't understand the downvotes, and your posts were rather enlightening.
Hang on: dang is an HN mod. I'm not. I'm just someone who comments too often.
Re:LSD: The Geek's Wonder Drug? (2006)
by anonbanker on Sunday January 25, 2015 @04:41PM
(#8944375)
Which is why I figured you'd be first to know. :-)
> 4. Be skeptical, read the literature; understand the risks you are taking.
is bad? Is the idea that we should turn off critical thought and blindly accept pro-LSD arguments, while blindly rejecting the anti-LSD arguments? That seems backwards.