zlacker

>>Ozarki+(OP)
Absolute no brainer, he should be celebrated. Countless lives were saved via the harm reduction effect of a peer reviewed, reputation based platform. Of course if we had less draconian drug policy, it wouldn't be necessary but here we are.

>>l0ng1n+61
> Countless lives were saved via the harm reduction effect of a peer reviewed, reputation based platform.

The basic immorality/pointlessness of the war on drugs aside, I don't know how you can assert this: it's not like there's a chain of provenance, and there's no particular guarantee that whatever grade of pure drugs was sold on Silk Road is the same purity that ended up in peoples' bodies.

My understanding of the Silk Road case is that, at its peak, it was servicing a significant portion of the international drug market. The dimensions of that market include adulteration; Silk Road almost certainly didn't change that.

>>woodru+y3
The overwhelming majority of listings on the site were for personal use quantities.

>>l0ng1n+u6
The overwhelming majority of drug sales are for personal use. That doesn't mean that large sales weren't made, or that those weren't in fact a significant portion of the site's revenue.

>>woodru+R9
>it's not like there's a chain of provenance, and there's no particular guarantee that whatever grade of pure drugs was sold on Silk Road is the same purity that ended up in peoples' bodies.

The fact that the majority of listings on the site were for personal use quantities suggests that the majority of sales were to end users rather than traffickers.

It's hard to dispute that this saved lives and I would speculate that it saved many lives.

>That doesn't mean that large sales weren't made, or that those weren't in fact a significant portion of the site's revenue.

Nobody made any claim that large sales weren't made, of course they were.