Talk:High Times

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

you people are all petty and stupid. you are passionately arguing about an entry in an encyclopedia that caters primarily to nerds. fucking losers. 208.103.185.25 19:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

While the "petty" argument does sometimes hold true for Wikipedians, what's truly "petty and stupid" is your bothering to edit this page just to tell them how "petty and stupid" they all are, especially considering that the arguments you were ranting about were from JULY, from over 2 and a half months before you bothered to waste your time posting. :P

[edit] Admin abuse

User:Cberlet, personally associated with this publication, reverted my factual edits backed up by references, leaving no reason on the edit summary and on the talk page. [1] Then the page was protected by User:SlimVirgin, a friend of Cberlet who has been POV warring against me. Admins are not editors and SlimVirgin is abusing his powers. Cognition 5 July 2005 01:19 (UTC)

Admins are editors. We're just not supposed to take admin action in relation to pages we're currently editing, and I have never edited this page.

What makes you think I'm a friend of Cberlet? That's a point the previous LaRouchie made more than once. But as a new user, you'd have no reason to think that. SlimVirgin ^(talk) July 5, 2005 01:22 (UTC)

When it's proved that I'm not in California but in the Southeastern United States (i.e. that I'm not Hershel) you are going to be so embarassed. Cognition 5 July 2005 01:26 (UTC)

But are you user:C Colden or user:Weed Harper? There's one very easy way to settle where you are. You could e-mail me from an address that shows your IP address. SlimVirgin ^(talk) July 5, 2005 01:30 (UTC)

Since you have been stalking me online, I do not trust you to know where I live. Take it to a developer, who will tell you that I live in Florida. Cognition 5 July 2005 01:39 (UTC)

Um, Cog, those edits you made here were POV pushing and don't belong on this article. For High Times it is sufficient to mention that the magazine promotes marijuana, and if the reader then wants to read more about any controversies over marijuana they can follow the Wikilink to the marijuana article. That's why we have Wikilinks in articles. General controversies over marijuana (not to mention Playboy etc.) belong on the article more closely related to them *unless* they are specific to High Times magazine, which your edits most certainly were not. Kaibabsquirrel 5 July 2005 02:33 (UTC)

Controversies about marijuana are controversies about High Times, and thus very relevant in this article. Cognition 5 July 2005 02:45 (UTC)

Only if they specifically have something to do with High Times, and not just marijuana in general. Otherwise they belong on the marijuana article. Kaibabsquirrel 5 July 2005 02:53 (UTC)

This article still needs thorough NPOVing. The publication is very controversial, yet it is solely written from the perspective of one of its writers.

Cognition Sign up for the association of drug free Wikipedians\^{(caint) 9 July 2005 10:07 (UTC)}

I urge people to review the article history. If they do that, they will see that I did not create this page, and that most of the claims by Cognition are without any foundation whatsover. This is another example of a LaRouche devotee being unable to edit in a coherent and NPOV way. --Cberlet 21:54, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I didn't say that you created the page. But it's certainly written from the POV of its writers nevertheless. Cognition Sign up for the association of drug free Wikipedians\^(caint)

[edit] Leaf Insert

I heard that in a recent issue of High Times there was an insert containing the leaf of a male marijuana plant. Is this true? If this is true how can they legally do it? 67.165.189.233 16:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The leaf of a male marijuana plant is the rough equivalent of catnip, and its THC level is often below legal limits.--Cberlet 02:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, for purists, there is no THC in catnip, and studies show that you have to smoke a whole lot of catnip to get a buzz, which is the point...the leaf of a male marijuana plant has relatively little psychoactive content compared to the resin that collects on the surface of the female leaf.--Cberlet 02:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

What issue is this male leaf supposed to have been inserted? Not aware of it. Is this an Internet legend?--Cberlet 02:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greg Green

Would you like to make an input into Greg Green. A HT contributor says that HT cites Green. If you have anything to offer, please do. (Backlit 07:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC))