BlutnedDaily

I can do something if you'd like. I'm pretty damn good with PS, if I do say so myself

Well first off, let me say that I don't mind them coming, so you don't have to do much work (I already got rid of one and plan on getting rid of another). But I remember adding a few of these guys to my shortlist a few weeks ago and forgot about them tbh, but I want to say it was about two weeks ago. I went back onto the FA list two-three days ago looking to pick up a few fighters whose time left wasn't very long for my event this weekend, and I already had two fighters on shortlist at that time (which I added, but they still had a few days left until the time was over so I was looking for quicker times) and picked a few people. Once their time expired, which was about 3 a.m. and 4 a.m. west coast time respectively, no notices were given to me. I even checked back at about noon and still, nothing about them. I didn't notice I had gotten anybody until I had two contract offers for the same guy and when I checked my fighters list, I had 5 new fighters. I just don't know how I had such a big jump in fighters.

This is a little bit of a weird situation, but I was trying to sign some FA to help with my org a little until it got successful enough. So I remember trying to get some a few weeks ago but the time passed and I never got any, so I shortlisted 4 more that would've been signed in time for my org's first card on Sunday. Well yesterday, I went from 5 fighters to 10 (released one, down to 9 now) and I don't understand if it was random or if it just takes a few weeks to clear FAs. If there is a topic somebody can point me to if this has been discussed, that would be awesome and you could lock this one. Thanks.

He's also from Israel, if I remember correctly. Maybe we should start a 'fun facts' about Offer 'Vince' Shlomi. I'll go first. His first name is Offer. (wtf?)

Heh, I wouldn't need to make up a guy for a forum argument. I gave his username as well as the forum he posts on, so feel free to check it out. Anyway, here are a couple of articles I've found. It's 1:03 here so I'll be finding more after some sleep, but this is what I've found so far. http://blog.norml.org/2009/05/14/dont-beli...nt-pot-so-what/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/29/d...l_n_209080.html Here's a quote from the second link... Like I said, this is the average potency in today's bud. Compared to their 3% study for the 60's and 70's, it would mean that pot has only gone up 5.5% in potency through all of our "advancements" in growing. I have no doubt in my mind that in future years, there will be a way to increase potency in some fashion, but as of right now, there is nothing you can do beyond using the perfect growing technique to increase the potency whatsoever. The only reason why it's in the 8's is because more people have access to that. If the statistic about California being accountable for 1/3 of the marijuana in the US, then I can definitely see why

Ok, so you have it down to a science... but can you get the potency above 30%? 50%? Of course having the internet and all of the information on it is great, but it's not like the internet is the reason for stronger bud. Yes, it sped up the process of releasing information to millions of people, but think about it like this. All information (growing, at least) that you find about marijuana online is coming from growers. Whether it be a scientist growing in a lab or a stoner growing in his basement, the information still came from a grower. There is no article that will guarantee more potent bud or claim you can double the potency of your bud because there is no such thing. The information given about bud right now is from trial and error over many, many years from many, many growers. You have it down to a science now because other growers have done the trials and errors and found out what brings out the most in your strain. The strain itself has a cut off on the THC levels it can have, though. If you take bag seed from a brick of mexican schwag and a seed from a seed bank, grow them the same exact way, same nutrients, same amount/type of light, same amount of water, etc and I guarantee you the seed bank seed will be a LOT more dank than the mexican schwag seed you planted. It has nothing to do with how you grew it, it just happens to be genetics that came along with it. To sum it up, growing techniques have been figured out down to a science, like DIDM has stated, but that doesn't mean the potency is "increased"; it's just getting the most THC from it that that specific strain can produce. I don't see that as increasing potency because you're growing it the way it's supposed to be grown, but you're not really "adding" potency that shouldn't be there, if that makes sense.

Uh... no. If there were "radical improvements" in growing in the last 20 years, the average bud potency wouldn't have been 8% in 2008. There is only two ways to increase potency: 1) Cross/selective breeding really good strains together, or 2) Continuous growing. By this I mean you grow a plant, pollinate a branch of it, take those seeds and keep repeating for generations. But there is only so far it can go for now... I think the top bud potency they found was in the high 20's, but I digress. If there were true improvements to potency, we wouldn't need to make things like hash or honey oil because the potency would already be on the same level or even possibly higher. You don't show me any evidence to these "radical improvements" and that's because there are none. The ONLY thing you will find in that regard is that "marijuana is 30x as potent as in the 60's" or bullshit like that. You know why they say that? Because dank bud is more readily available now than it was then. Hydroponics, which many people claim to be "advanced" growing, is used because it yields a lot of bud in a short amount of time. Don't take it like I'm saying the bud doesn't turn out good because it definitely does, but you will never get better bud than having it grown by natural sunlight. They've actually found that people who grew thousands of years ago didn't grow too much differently than we do today. On the forums I visit, Grasscity, there is a guy by the name of Old Skool Grower (OSG for short) and he's been growing longer than most of the people on this board have probably been smoking it, and he has some of the dankest buds I've EVER seen. He will even contend that the best of today's bud vs the best of yesteryear's bud is hardly different. I just find it hard to believe that a guy with 40+ years experience with (dank) bud wouldn't know what he was talking about. Show me the 'proof' that the growing techniques have increased potency and I'm sure I'll be able to give you a valid reason (which will most likely lead back to - you guessed it - good bud being more readily available today than back then. And to whoever said Canadian bud is better than California's, it isn't; it's just cheaper. Medical MJ dispensaries are worried about selling it too cheap because street dealers will get a hold of it and flip it for double the price. It's unfair, but it is what it is.

Lol, read my post above. The potency hasn't increased, it's just the more potent stuff is more readily available than back then. Think about this - they found a stash from over a thousand years ago (female bud only, no males) buried with a guy. Had potency increased, they would've been smoking 0.1 potency bud since in the 60's it was around 3%. Do you know how they get those statistics? They test the potency of all the bud that is confiscated and then they average it out. That means that back then, more brick bud was available than dank. Why do you think so many dedicated growers pay so much money for original strains? They wouldn't pay that much for shitty bud, I'll tell you what. The only thing that has improved is the growing techniques to yield more quantity, but there isn't a way to increase potency unless you want to make hash.

Lol I've read some crazy claims in here... let's see if I can sort some of this stuff. 1) Purple Haze is technically extinct - but so is almost every single original strain there is. The only people with these are old school hippies who have kept seeds over time. Most of todays stuff is a hybrid of strains, so if you get Purple Haze, you're most likely getting Purple Haze crossed with another strain. 2) Don't let people say bud now is better than it was in the 60's or 70's - it's one of the biggest myths out there! While I can't personally speak from experience, I know people who have grown for 30+ years and say our stuff is no better or worst than what they have, it's just more abundant now. Our techniques for growing bud have improved but techniques to increase potency have not. Nowadays, dank bud is readily available in most places, as opposed to back in the day. That's why they say bud was only about 3% THC now compared to the 8+% in 2008 (from DEA statistics); a lot of bud was dry, brown and compressed dirt bud which brought the average potency down. A lot of pictures you see from back then will also look pretty bad, but that's because of the camera quality and because many growers would leave the fan leaves on so you wouldn't lose any of the trichomes (crystals) while handling the bud. 3) Canada is only better than California in terms of bud because of prices. The dispensaries pretty much fuel the weed down there, but they mark up their prices so dealers don't buy an ounce and flip it for twice the price, but they can still get their money from it at their current prices, just not as much. And by the way, Canada isn't the only place where they have a marijuana party 4) To the guy in Aussie - we do have to pay 70-90 for a quarter ounce, and in a lot of places even more! On Grasscity, it's not crazy to hear people getting dank bud for 120 a quarter ounce; I've seen a guy saying he paid 180! Luckily the most I ever have to pay is 85, although that's pricey to a lot of people still. Ok, I don't feel like reading the rest of what was posted lol.

iloveme, all I can say is LOL. First off, over 33% (1/3) of the bud in the US comes from California. So unless you know the grower that you're getting it from, you had a 1 in 3 chance of smoking some Cali buds. Secondly, while I've heard Colorado does get some pretty dank shit depending on the area you are in, they have no where near the amount of dank as Oregon or Cali. I can't vouch for Washington because half of the bud I get from there is dank and the other half is schwag, so it's a hit or miss. But to say that most of the Cali and Oregon you've gotten is either: 1) You haven't had Oregon/Cali bud and are claiming that to show CO has better greens 2) It's been through too man hands and most of the visible trichs are gone 3) Whoever hooked you up with said bud didn't know what they were talking about. I've learned that with bud, unless you know the direct source you have about a 5% chance of getting what they said you paid for - it's just how it is. And DIDM, PDX is fun and all but it's a freakin ghost town at night in half of Portland and fiend/gangbanger central in the other half. It's only fun during the day and sometimes night when something good is going on, but overall I'd take Beaverton I think. Then again, I haven't been that many places in Portland or going down there just to chill, it's usually because I have a weed mission or I need to go to a specific place there.

Yeah, yeah, laugh it up... at least I'd be able to claim I was so ripped I couldn't spell 'Blunted' right xD

The "Great Northwest", huh? Is that Washington or Oregon, because I'm over here in Beaverton (OR) and let me tell ya, we get some AWESOME bud here.

Well I'm bored and waiting for my guy, so I thought I'd see who all loves to rip the bong

It's all fixed - thanks a bunch!

Kyle Andrews - 35604 Thiago Alves - 18169 Sun Kato - 28299 Stan Marsh - 31204 Showtime Series Event - 25062 Thanks Mike.