LAist: Wake n Bake: Sour Diesel

Austist

Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:48:47 -0800

If you're gonna write an 'opinion' blog, then at least put some opinion in it. Sativa vs. Indica's in the morning? Why? What type of wheat bread goes best with a good Sativa? And why not coffee and Sativa? Dry Fruit Loops or sliced oranges after that? This was more like a picture boastin' your new stash. Not a review. Step up the reviewing! I will now go and blow some sativa smoke into my cats face, then laugh and say "He's so high duuude..." I'm from that subculture.

kifbox

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 14:42:30 -0800

Nothing wrong with a little review of what's happening on the other side of mother nature...chillax people...no one here is selling anything to your kids or exorting the masses to light up...even though the masses should seriously consider it. I say keep the reviews!

Tony Pierce

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:32:21 -0800

hey Teddy, if youre going to try to be so witty, why not put your name next it? What are you scared of?

guest

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:26:31 -0800

pot is sooo cool and laist is so edgy and wild!

Elise Thompson

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:15:27 -0800

Oh my God, now I totally want to post a video of me feeding my cat (and no, I'm not high).

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:48:48 -0800

ya jeffro is cool ... i wanna read his blog

qwerty

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:23:09 -0800

jeffro and I are on the same page. #19 says it all.

buzz

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 15:34:04 -0800

may i suggest something? everyone smoke a bowl and calm the f down. i understand where tony was coming from. previous weed reviews have been lambasted in the comments by people who hate the fact that LAist has added this feature - perhaps his back is up about that and he was a little defensive. by the same token, i don't think commentors really need to be armchair english professors - if you don't like what someone writes or the way they write, bypass their articles. it really is that simple. the drama needs to cease.

Henry D

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 15:29:10 -0800

I meant "you commentors" playfully. No offense I hope. However I disagree that the sarcastic and berating overtones of the first two articles are "constructive" criticisms at all. Second, I never criticized anyone for practicing freedom of speech. I didn't convey a "take your comments elsewhere" rhetoric. I merely criticized the self-righteous nature of those who scoff at the idea that shit, once in a while there are individuals who actually smoke pot *gasp*. Believe it or not, it really fuckin' happens. Perhaps through MY criticism they may one day alter their world view to accept that people smoke weed. We aren't talking about hallucinogens or amphetamines. If we reviewed porno, there would still be people that would complain "SOME JOURNALISM! WAY TO BE CLASSY LAIST!" There shouldn't be any taboo topic here. Our editor tries to foster a "say anything as long as it isn't offensive racially, religiously, etc" writing environment. Point being, if weed isn't your cup of tea, it takes about 0.2 seconds to scroll down past it. Third, you were nitpicking but fine. I will concede that Spike Lee does not have cancer, despite the fact that I keep trying to edit his Wikipedia entry to say so.

jeffro

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 15:24:12 -0800

Tony, rebuttals are perfectly fine but ought to be worded with respect. #9 is antagonistic in tone. That's my opinion. I think it's great that bloggers are replying back to commentors; interaction is part of the beauty of blogs But an author or editor using the comment section to tell their readers what they 'need to be' is not an impressive standard of etiquette. That sort of response is reactionary and unnecessary. In this case especially the author's rebuttal didn't even correlate to reader's comments. He tells your readers they need 'to be more accepting of subcultures'. Where did that come from? No one said, "don't report on pot, it isn't part of our community". Readers gave the constructive criticism that 'hey, if you're gonna write about pot, write about more than the fact that you just smoked a bowl.' Cat owners are a 'subculture' of Los Angeles as well. And maybe someone will write a really insightful or entertaining article for LAist about LA housecats. But if someone writes a post that says all of "some people get up in the morning and feed their dog. I get up in the morning and feed my cat. After the jump, a YouTube video showing me feeding my cat," you should probably expect your readers to call BS on it just as they did on this post.

Tony Pierce

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:36:45 -0800

Robert, who said that i had a problem with commentors practicing their freedom of speech? it seems to me that you and jeffro feel like its ok for you to comment, but its not ok for us to rebut. simply replying back to people isnt dissing them. indeed, bloggers replying back to their commentors is as old as blogging.

jeffro

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:16:07 -0800

diss your readership and you may find your readers find another blog seriously, you're going to get positive comments and you're going to get negative comments. But it's undeniably bad form to deride your readership (or "you commentors", as the author put it). Especially since their criticisms were relatively constructive. And libel laws can be applied to blogs. Spike Lee may be too busy to care but make a few posts claiming that Tom Cruise is gay and see what shows up at your door.

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:15:41 -0800

i love these weed reviews. as i've said before, it's pretty easy to bypass articles on this blog that you're not interested in. just keep scrolling. seriously. quit being so self-righteous - SERIOUSLY.

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:59:40 -0800

Here are two things you have to come to accept about LAist: 1) it is run by a bunch of pot heads 2) the writers enjoy the freedom to say anything they want ... but should a commenter try to practice the same freedom of speech, he/she will be ridiculed until he/she is driven away... then we'll be able to just have comments about how wonderful and perfect LAist is you are cool and all LAist, but you don't take criticism well at all now disregard my comment and go cry about how i'm only a guest ROBERT

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:56:08 -0800

Henry D: I love me a good bowl. But if you're gonna write something about it, don't just tell me you like to wake up and spark it up. BFD. Tony Pierce, I don't know what you're talking about, but shit, give me some of what you're smoking.

Tony Pierce

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:45:14 -0800

Buddah once simply held up a lotus flower and everyone was enlightened just because some of our "reviews" dont fit inside your narrow view or expectations, doesn't necessarily mean our review is lacking it might instead mean that you are not being open to the nirvana in front of you.

ben bang

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:09:33 -0800

I prefer a Sativa in the morning, too. Sour Diesel tops the list. A+.

LA Scumbag

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:55:25 -0800

Actually diesel is not quite a kush, All kushes are heavy indicas as opposed to the sour d which is a sativa. OG Kush smells very similar to Sour D and it's because they're rumored to both stem from the Chem Dog strain.

Anti

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:48:49 -0800

Sour Diesel is prolly my most favorite of all the kush strains.

Henry D

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:44:21 -0800

You commentors need to be less elitist and more accepting of subcultures. Weed is definitely a subculture of LA. And quit applying your conservative definition of journalism to a blog. A blog is not a newspaper for obvious reasons. We say what we want and that is why we are read. I can say shit piss fuck cunt. I can say Spike Lee has cancer. Who gives a fuck. This is a blog. Enjoy it.

qwerty

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:30:49 -0800

I'm all for pot reviews. That being said, this "article" was a bit devoid of substance.

grungyjoe

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:21:59 -0800

That nugget looks delicious show me more !

Carrie Meathrell

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:21:51 -0800

hahahaha "class this joint up" that's funny!!! you commenters are just a bunch of silly billies!

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:17:02 -0800

This is dope i think , that nug looks tasty. I think this is a article maybee that guy needs to think.. Does he qualify for being a dork!

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:16:22 -0800

Really. Unless you tell me where to get some, this post does me no good.

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:06:13 -0800

I think you mean "way to class this BONG up."

benackerman

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:52:43 -0800

dude seriously? first a weed review and now a post about wake and baking? did someone really make a decision that LAist.com needs more pot articles? way to class this joint up.

guest

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:30:18 -0800

How does this even qualify as an "article?" I look to you for the interesting and unique happenings in LA, and you give me this. Well done LAist... journalism at its finest.