Hello Nexians!

As I look through the wiki, why are there so many teks?

It makes sense that science is a learning process. First we try multiple methods and then we refine what we already know.

I also understand different teks across species of plants. Or even a different tek for the limited resources avalaible in the region. Although, for a specific plant and resources it only makes sense that one single tek would triumph.

Could fellow nexians enlighten me? Maybe I am just missing something.

The teks on the wiki represent the teks most popularly used by members here over the years. Some have been superseded as knowledge has grown over the years, some have been refined.

It is maybe a little intimidating to be confronted with such a list. Some teks are better than others (Lazyman seems to have brought more than its fair share of issues and questions from new extractors on the forum). Deciding on a tek comes down to personal preference, [perceived] skill level, time available, choice of materials … it goes on. Of course we also have different alkaloids being extracted from a variety of materials.

Personally, with spice I started with Noman’s, it seemed easier than going the A/B route, later moved I onto Marsofold and then added in my own findings and techniques and do an A/B that is vaguely based on the Marsofold tek. Along the way I have tried dry teks, limonene, extracting with freeze/thaws.

I think it would be nice to trim down the huge list we have here, or maybe at the least mark a few teks as deprecated. A variety, while potentially intimidating, gives choice and opportunity to learn though.

See this is something I don't understand myself as they're all basically the same thing. My biggest gripe about this community is many reinvent the wheel, others discourage or openly flame over exploration. I've had my membership stripped for suggesting a solvent listed under the FAQ simply because it was more efficient and non-flammable.

I can see a tek for using different solvents and materials.

I guess my interpertation of this place is unless you use their exact prefered equipment/solvents then your contributions won't be taken in eagerly.

I may be very generalizing and maybe a bit too harsh, but I don't have the same fondness I once had for this place after actually meeting the members I've come to respect the most.

Most of the creative, new ideas that make me stop and think have typically come from newer members. So to veer back on topic the summary to my answer is this:

Older members believe only in 'the one true way' and anyone who practices different is critisized to silence. Not everyone is like this, mind you.

And alot of new ideas come from newer members but many of whom only want help with an extraction and don't typically stick around or explore.

I'm sorry that you feel this way, but my experience on this forum has been quite different than yours. I have found the exact opposite to be true here, with most of the long-standing members being very open to new ideas. Only very rarely have I seen posts that would fit your description from long-time members.

I agree. For both the infrequent community member and habitiual. It is a learning process, but at some point I think we should refine what we already know.

If you had to say what the top of A/B, STB and A/B-STB hybrid are...what would you say(this is to everyone)?



That is how I feel. Besides different solvents and materials. It should always be the same measurements. I just don't understand.



If this were true, there would be a small amount of teks. There isn't. Someone somewhere is willing to post alterations of a technique that have worked in the past.

^ This

All the teks here are more or less the same process. I highly recommend reading this thread to get a good foundation in what's going on with all these teks. Once you understand the basic principles behind the process the only real major differences in the teks are materials and a various individual tips, tricks, and methodologies. Granted there is a lot of redundancy, it can be helpful to see how people tailor the process to their own situation. Many paths up the same mountain and all that.

I mean to say that it's all naptha and lye here. Sometimes limonene and lye.

I've offered suggestions for work around to mini a/b(s) and have been openly flamed for it. I've posted quite a bit of stuff regarding safe/alternative practices. Sofar unless it's an a/b extract with naptha/mason jars it's not welcome here from what I can tell. Just the other day somebody deleted a bunch of posts regarding chloroform. I noticed this after my post count dropped largely.

One thing I've noticed that sets the nexus apart from many other communities is that it instructs the users to purchase watched and dangerous chemicals and manufacture schedual 1 substances. Now let me be clear, I hold entheogens very near and dear, but that doesn't change how the law sees it. This by itself is incredibly unique; you're hard pressed to find too many other forums that would allow this and not stamp "legal disclaimer' all over the place.

I've been in the chat, and what really frustrated me was the way many mods would talk about the members like they were brain damaged infants. It went above the nexus attitude about safety and became entirely condescending toward many of the general userbase. I think Trav is spot on about safety and harm reduction being a fulcrum of this community. But the impression that was left on me was a level of superiority and elitism over the memberbase that stifled useful information that could be used. If we're going to use powerful oxidizing bases and combustable solvents to prepare life altering substances than shouldn't we expect a bottom-line level of responsibilty?

I think this is the reason why techs are so limited. And to play devil's advocate, I'll paraphrase another member: snozzleberry. He stated that we already have methods that can effectively extract nearly all DMT alkaloids to a great level of purity. And he's very right. But are there better methods? Are they better for everybody or just some?

I'll attack the logic of multiple extractions, not just attack it, bit kill it here, and now in cold blood. We have 2. Acid/base teks and straight to base teks. Stb teks are well, there's only 1 tek. I tried expanding on it and I had a frustrating time with it.

A/B teks seem more or less somebody improves or expands upon an older tech and a new one is born. I see them less as alternative teks but as an iteration of out-dated ones. Something reminiscent to a software update. We just keep the old versions around.

I've seen a couple people inquire about the nexus, and describe this community as one flowing with intellect, and potential. As long as we follow the guidelines trav set us up with, why are we holding back the potential of our members?

This is important, but only to a point. Eventually we should make one path up the hill for certain situtations, but in that same situation it should be the same thing.



Which ones?



I agree it is a good idea to stay withing the rules. Although, it is never bad to experiment.

Because everyone wants to have his name attached to something, feel great about himself and be recognized by his peers. A ton of these teks add nothing really new.

/\ that. I'm glad you said it first, obli.

I don't want to invalidate your feelings, ice, but I've not been witness to attacks or been aware of posts being deleted because they weren't regarding naptha/lye/glass. I mean there's one in active discussion right now with sodium carb, vinegar, and something else. (Sorry i just spent my welfare check on weed and I'm to lazy to look it up).

But yeah,to a newcomer, it can be pretty daunting. When i was learning about extracting at first, with NO chemistry knowledge-didn't even know the difference between freebase and acid- it took ALOT of reading. Perhaps to lighten the load of newbie questions the list could be edited. I like the idea of a "deprecated"tag.

So then we should go through and mark alot of teks as merely having historical value. Multiple teks should gear around the technician's skills. Maybe put up a sticky saying "these kinds of teks are what we need help on"

There was an ethanol based tek that didn't look too bad. Imho different materials should require different teks. When extracting with naptha or chloroform I wouldn't follow an identical path.

If I was extracting mg seeds I'd do a bulk extraction using continuous heavy phase liquid extraction, where with mhrb I might just stir the hell out of it with solvent. Diff 'teks', different plants, and different materials.

Teks should be set at a skill level, and the skill level should be taken into consideration with materials being used. Looking at about what you said about freebase and acid salts, really brings out that there is no 1 size fits all tek.

To each their own. Do the research and reading thoroughly.

there are so many teks for ease and efficiency

so those who don't have lye can work with sodium carbonate or calcium hydroxide

also there are so many solvent choices so if naptha is unavailable , one could use limonene toluene , xylene or acetone , alcohol

also some of the newer teks are geared towards environment friendly ways of doing this , and some like the salt teks are clearly invented for greater efficiency

---

also 1ce your membership issues have probably something to do with this thread https://www.dmt-nexus.me...aspx?g=posts&t=61686 ,

also much of what you have written about the nexus paints it in a false light and is far from the truth of this place

I don't think my membership issues have anything to do with me taking 50mg doses.. (???) I believe it had more to do with my fondness of using chloroform as an extraction solvent. And I will stand by this solvent as my solvent of choice for most plant extractions.

More over on the topic side of things,

The teks *could* be rewritten to expand and elaborate on material choices since the actual proceedure doesn't vary any. Acetone would only exist in a dry tek as it's miscible with water, so I can understand a tek for that. Maybe instead of 9001 teks we could have a 'choosing your materials' chapter of a tek which expands upon the pros and the cons of using and choosing them. That may even help with some thread cleanup if we consolidate information more.

notice that there's no benz's tek. why?
because i'm too lazy.
dcm is my solvent of choice, but i'm not going to try to persuade others into using it. from a molecular interaction standpoint, it is not without its disadvantages, like chloroform.

there are a ton of teks, but most of them fit the "kitchen chem" availability/obtainability aspect; they also give peace of mind to those who are wary about the chemicals they handle/consume. reinventing the wheel isn't even an accurate analogy, perhaps skinning a cat is.

some of them may have marginal changes, thus, marginal advantages (i.e. solvents that are similar in structure, with one yielding slightly better solvation, but is much more difficult/expensive to obtain) . perhaps those may be considered for removal.

I'm already selected to review papers here, I'll review teks too.

^lucky, DCM can't be got here, it's liquid gold. I guess yeah, but do we 'have' to have both a limonene/sodium bicarbonate and naptha/limonene teks, when we could just have 1 tek and mention they could be substituted?

Off the topic of this thread, I was thinking of posting a mixing substitute using a burette/glass beads to drip your basic solution through. The solution would fall through some surface solvent, and fall down around the beads collecting at the bottom. This *does* favor sep funnel users because the burette/sep can release solvent at the same time making an automated process, even still it ain't needed. But it mixes thoroughly with no risk of emulsion and you can use a tiny bit of solvent. Burettes can be had for CHEAP.

the limonene and sodium carbonate teks satisfy the "food-safe" concerns of our patchouli-loving members, who're concerned about handling/consuming caustic materials and petrol-derived solvents. Although I used to see this as misguided, I can also respect their choices; also, those solvents/reagents are easier form them to obtain.

Right, and I'm in no disagreement over that. But a small paragraph on a materials needed section of a tek could briefly explain this without having to become an entirely bew tek.

yea, that's reasonable.
I need to look at the wiki page. This does sound like another practical way of streamlining the forum, like cleaning up junk/redundant threads.

you should probably be promoted, you have my vote.

i don't subscribe to groupthink. however, observing safety is priority one. aside from the attitude guidelines (which I have no say in), it's the only thing i adamantly support. therefore,

I won't support discussion of pyrophoric/energetic reactions which require inert atmospheres (ex. raney nickel hydrogenation, azide coupling, acetylation, etc.), or anything involving acquisition/synthesis of chemicals which would instantly raise legal red flags. there are other forums, like scimadness, which are more suitable for such discussion.

My journey into organic chemistry was in pursuit of explosives synthesis(s). I became aquinted with a few unfortunate people who's only mistake was a half moment's lapse in judgement. I learned a couple of important things fairly early.

Reagents have to be made, and half the time this is harder to do than the origional synthesis. So studying time and getting down and dirty is a must.

Secondly, dying may not be the worst thing that happens to you, and you only need to make 1 mistake in your life to learn this. Safety is an obligation, not a suggestion!