where to find instructions for DLMT (non-dump method)

[[Co...]]

Hi

I've seen instructions on youtube for the milk solution, dumping method. But does anyone know where to find instructions for the Daily Liquid Micro Taper where you do NOT dump any of the medicine and vodka is used as a solvent, where you draw up just the individual doses? I had help from Bella, Jim Hawk and Builder and found it to be so simple - it makes more sense for those worried about running out of their RX....but  I have such a hard time explaining it to anyone with my  brain.  I tell them to search here but they get frustrated. Also, when I send someone to BenzoBuddies and they look up "liquid titration" on the withdrawal methods section it lists the cons for the milk solution and the dump method, (spoilage, being tied to the kitchen, etc) These drawbacks are avoided by using the non-dump, vodka method. I have a great system but don't know the first thing about making a video!

Thanks for reading!

Juelli

 

I know your motivation is altruistic, but do folks really need a video to learn how to combine 3 ingredients?  It's about like adding cream and sugar to your coffee.

 

Builder-

 

This post is not only offensive and triggering to some of our members, it is condescending and violates the forum Rules & Guidelines

 

Be polite towards, and respectful of, your fellow Buddies. We do not tolerate attacks upon fellow members. Any account created for the purposes of causing arguments and/or ill-feeling will be banned.

 

We have received reports about these type of posts from you. We will not tolerate this. Please refrain from these types of posts in the future or your posting privileges will be restricted.

 

Bella

 

Hi all.

 

First of all, I wish to make absolutely clear, it has been many years since I've been involved in day-to-day moderation matters at BB. Only only in exceptional circumstances, do I become involved. Such occasions are limited to rather extreme cases where the Admins feel my input would be helpful. Really, this case does not rise to that standard. I am only replying now because a member PM'd me and asked me to review this thread. I also note that my name has be invoked within this thread. Since I posses neither the time nor the inclination to start reading around moderation and public threads, my comments here will be based purely upon what I have read here.

 

In isolation, I would not have reacted to Builder's comments above. They would strike me as nothing more than robust comment. However, it also seems clear - from comments posted to this thread - that there are other moderation issues involving Builder. So, a moderator might well look at the comments above differently to me because of a wider context of problematic behaviour. Is this fair? Well, that's difficult to say. In a pure sense, it is not. But, from a practical perspective, it is not possible to unknow information we might hold about about wider concerns or issues. If an account is being watched, it is inevitable that the person(s) watching the account will be more vigilant of behaviour which seems to match prior problematic behaviour. This is only natural, and we all do it sometimes.

 

My view is that members should be allowed to engage in robust debate at BB. But, I am also mindful of the more vulnerable nature of our average member compared to the general population. So, if we are to respect our members as grown-ups, we should allow for vigorous and robust debate. On the other hand, given the more delicate disposition of much of our membership, I think it only fair to expect members to take this into account when engaging in debate at BB.

 

So, what I suggest to the moderation team, members who become the subject of moderation actions, and the membership as a whole are the following:

 

1) Normally, moderators should attempt to moderate the immediate action as independently as possible. Though, sometimes, a wider (perhaps non-public) context will make this difficult or even inappropriate. Sometimes, a member rightly should be on a tight leash following a spate of problematic behaviour.

 

2) Members should understand that freedom of speech is always limited by the environment. The owner of any particular outlet or platform can (and should) decide upon the appropriate limits and restrictions they would like to apply to the space they operate. For our members, this means that you are free to express nearly any view they wish, so long as it does not interfere with our mission statement and does not attempt to sabotage the particular aims of individual members. But at the same time, members must remain respectful of other members and their feelings. I accept that this position statement is a bit wishy-washy, but it comes from trying to balance quite disparate forces and considerations. Consequently, it is not an easy policy for moderators to enforce.

 

3) The wider membership should appreciate that they normally will not be privy to all the considerations involved in particular moderation actions. It is not reasonable to suppose that you know better (because there are often other, non-public considerations involved in moderation actions). Because of this, a few years ago we introduced new rules about how members should respond to moderation actions with which they disagree. These rules were introduced because: a) very often, members do not know all the relevant facts; b) except in exceptional circumstances, the team will not discuss moderation actions with third-parties (those being moderated usually appreciate this); and c) public discussion regarding specific moderation actions often leads to more unrest out on the forum.

 

To be clear - since I have no intention to delve into the background - the above comments are general in nature and do not necessarily relate to this thread.

 

My best advise to all is to calm down. The intent behind text is often misunderstood and text-based discussion can (and often does) spiral down to a heated shouting match because of (initially) small misunderstandings and lack of thought about how each of us can - with just a few calming words - reverse the downward trajectory of an argument. I should also like to ask members to try to appreciate the difficult and often thankless task of moderating a forum. But most of all, all of us should think about the effects our words can have upon others - especially at a place like BB. So, be as bold as you like, but avoid personal remarks. Reflect upon your words if others have taken offense. And if someone mistakenly takes personally a comment you make, try to take the sting out of it. The bigger picture is us trying to help each other, not who is right and who is wrong.

 

And, a mea culpa. I too like a robust discussion. Sometimes, just like anyone else, I get the balance wrong, or do not back down because the other person is wrong. Even at BB, where I try my best to be independent and impartial, I sometimes fail. At other online spaces (for which I am not responsible), I surely fail far more often. I simply ask you all to reflect upon what you may have gotten wrong, the bigger picture, and how you might help engender a better atmosphere for all at BB.

 

If I have failed to consider anything very pertinent to this thread and discussion, I am sorry. As I said, I am not going to get deeply involved in the background and specifics of the arguments here. Although my comments here grow out of this discussion, they are intended more general in nature.

 

I wish you all the very best over the holidays.

[[Co...]]

One more comment. Tomorrow, I will try to make the time to comment on the true topic of this thread.

 

Good night, all.

[[In...]]

One more comment. Tomorrow, I will try to make the time to comment on the true topic of this thread.

 

Good night, all.

 

Thank you for your thoughts and comments Colin.

 

I would like to say that I do believe that over @95-97% of commentary on this thread was very positive and helpful.

 

Most people simply wondered where Jim Hawk and builder were and felt very good about the help either both or one them had given to that particular member.

 

And one more thing: this particular thread and the other one similar to it (which also has very positive and helpful commentary) have both remained calm and positive and have pretty much “trailed off” to the lower parts of the titration area where threads usually do go as new posting comes in.

 

I thought and still do think that original topic of the thread was to try to “cement” this “non dump” method of saving leftover titrated benzo into a jar (or something like that) to use later rather than rinsing it down the drain, and also about using that leftover titrated benzo in daily liquid microtapering.

 

Nevertheless, your thoughts will be interesting to read.

[[co...]]

Colin, that was a wonderful, well thought out, detailed post.

 

Thank you so much for everything.

[[bu...]]

Thanks for the response, Colin.