6 ms·

I know there's been an effort to use the word "Cannabis" as a way to sound legitimate, instead of pot/weed/marijuana. Do you react better to 'cannabis'?

protomyth 10y ago
You're right, I don't react better at all. They should stick with saying "THC and related compounds" instead. Its basically the same argument I have for the thorium folks, do not use "reactor" or "nuclear" in any naming or marketing.
- mjevans 10y ago
  Sort of like my own personal stance on 'breeder reactors' being 'waste reduction reactors'. The problem with most of that 'waste' (at least the non-byproducts kind) is that it's exactly that, actual waste instead of burnt fuel.
  - fapjacks 10y ago
    What about "spent nuclear waste reactors"? It's a big long-winded, but fully conveys that it runs on spent nuclear waste. I suppose it could be parsed weirdly.
- yarou 10y ago
  I think the word you're looking for is cannabinoids. You don't call opiates "morphine and related compounds".
  - protomyth 10y ago
    True, but morphine and opiates in a known bad along with cannabinoids not sounding much better. Acronyms and "compounds" don't set off the hate generally.
    - mistercow 10y ago
      I don't see a strong argument that "THC" is any better. Everyone knows what THC is.
      - protomyth 10y ago
        You'd be surprised (very surprised - its almost a dihydrogen monoxide thing in reverse), and truly acronyms get more respect.
      - reitanqild 10y ago
        Depends on your definition of everyone. I for one trigger significantly less on THC. It can also be argued that THC sounds more like a synthesised or refined version consisting of the active ingredients.
- tgb 10y ago
  The word "nuclear" was dropped from MRI (nee NMRI) to improve its influence. And, surprisingly, I was even able to find significant documentation of this fact [1], I was honestly expecting it to be folklore at best. Though my own research [2] kind of contradicts the idea that 'nuclear' was ever a popular part of the name. Or maybe it was [3], I dunno. [1] http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1407&context=facpub http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar... [2] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=NMRI%2CMRI%2C+NMRI&year_start=1960&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CNMRI%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CMRI%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CNMRI%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=NMRI%2CMRI%2C+... [3] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nuclear+magnetic+resonance%2C+magnetic+resonance+imaging&year_start=1960&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cnuclear%20magnetic%20resonance%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmagnetic%20resonance%20imaging%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nuclear+magnet...
  - civilian 10y ago
    I like it. I'm going to start referring to GMOs as "Advanced Varieties" and PHP as "Clarified Perl". :D
- tim333 10y ago
  Not sure that's going to wash with Thorium. Thorium reactors are very much full on nuclear reactors whatever you call them. (See the decomissioning section on the 1964-1969 Oak Ridge thorium reactor if you think they are problem free https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment#Decommissioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment...)

protomyth 10y ago

You're right, I don't react better at all. They should stick with saying "THC and related compounds" instead. Its basically the same argument I have for the thorium folks, do not use "reactor" or "nuclear" in any naming or marketing.

mjevans 10y ago
Sort of like my own personal stance on 'breeder reactors' being 'waste reduction reactors'. The problem with most of that 'waste' (at least the non-byproducts kind) is that it's exactly that, actual waste instead of burnt fuel.
- fapjacks 10y ago
  What about "spent nuclear waste reactors"? It's a big long-winded, but fully conveys that it runs on spent nuclear waste. I suppose it could be parsed weirdly.
yarou 10y ago
I think the word you're looking for is cannabinoids. You don't call opiates "morphine and related compounds".
- protomyth 10y ago
  True, but morphine and opiates in a known bad along with cannabinoids not sounding much better. Acronyms and "compounds" don't set off the hate generally.
  - mistercow 10y ago
    I don't see a strong argument that "THC" is any better. Everyone knows what THC is.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      You'd be surprised (very surprised - its almost a dihydrogen monoxide thing in reverse), and truly acronyms get more respect.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      Depends on your definition of everyone. I for one trigger significantly less on THC. It can also be argued that THC sounds more like a synthesised or refined version consisting of the active ingredients.
tgb 10y ago
The word "nuclear" was dropped from MRI (nee NMRI) to improve its influence. And, surprisingly, I was even able to find significant documentation of this fact [1], I was honestly expecting it to be folklore at best. Though my own research [2] kind of contradicts the idea that 'nuclear' was ever a popular part of the name. Or maybe it was [3], I dunno. [1] http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1407&context=facpub http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar... [2] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=NMRI%2CMRI%2C+NMRI&year_start=1960&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CNMRI%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CMRI%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CNMRI%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=NMRI%2CMRI%2C+... [3] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nuclear+magnetic+resonance%2C+magnetic+resonance+imaging&year_start=1960&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cnuclear%20magnetic%20resonance%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmagnetic%20resonance%20imaging%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nuclear+magnet...
- civilian 10y ago
  I like it. I'm going to start referring to GMOs as "Advanced Varieties" and PHP as "Clarified Perl". :D
tim333 10y ago
Not sure that's going to wash with Thorium. Thorium reactors are very much full on nuclear reactors whatever you call them. (See the decomissioning section on the 1964-1969 Oak Ridge thorium reactor if you think they are problem free https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment#Decommissioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment...)