How’s the taste?
1 Like
You know cbd hash rosin is my favorite brah.
4 Likes
Not as good as thc rosin. But im experimenting with different terp profiles of broad spectrum and full spectrum cbd extracts to dial it in. The CBD strains have different terp profiles but contain mostly the same terps, im a nerd im really into it
3 Likes
I learned a long time ago that if I make my products to my liking that I’m not reaching my target market, I’m mostly finding people that are like me.
3 Likes
That’s debatable. What @Waxplug1 said, I completely agree with. Each method of extraction has its place in hemp and recreational cannabis, depending on the owner’s (or that of the directing force) intended production and end product goals.
I guess I misunderstood what the real intention for producing everything GLGc was/is. I thought it was primarily (if not exclusively) geared towards operators.
Realistically, what owners need to know should have zero interaction with what entry-level, unexperienced processors need to know. They have absolutely nothing to do with one another, and to expect an experienceless operator to know what systems an owner should be running seems silly.
Each has merit, but not together, imho.
2 Likes
I’ve now read the handbook.
It’s not bad.
Definitely 101, but doesn’t pretend to be anything else.
If you’re going to call it a Handbook, it needs to look a LOT more like the books here:
Story time:
Whatever gripes we may have about them now, how did UL and ASME and NFPA become UL and ASME and NFPA?
They started out by being super useful to people who regulate things. Sometimes they still are. (Sometime’s they’re out to stick their hands into your pockets as deep as possible. I’m looking at you, UL.)
UL = Underwriters Laboratories.
Translates to: The lab who works for insurance underwriters and tells them “if you insure something that looks like THIS, you’re less likely to have to spend money on it because it’s not gonna kaboom during the usual course of business.”
FM global is another good source of Standards. They’re an insurance company, they cut out the middle man and do their own standards instead of paying someone else to develop them.
If the GLGc wants to be more than just one more random certifying body for the cannabis industry, it needs to be equally as useful to the industry.
It’s possible.
But gonna be a lot of fuckin work.
And yeah, drop the “gang” part - I agree with others here who have said that that’s a terrible fuckin name for a professional organization.
A lot of people here act like complete asshats sometimes. Myself included. You don’t need to name-drop this specific rowdy corner of the internet on the cover of the standard.
10 Likes
Hemp and MJ absolutely have different protocols for extraction and post processing- the vast majority of hemp is grown in a completely different manner than the vast majority of MJ, the economics of the products are vastly different and the distillation perameters are also quite different.
Have you ever tried to extract CBG with Heptane?
I like the handbook. Great start. I’m going to take this test and any others that come out. I really want to make medicine for a living instead of as an expensive hobby. Any upstate New York cannabis companies watching this unfold?
6 Likes
I’ve got a bit different take on this than maybe was intended: I’m going to make this handbook required reading for our sales, logistics, and administrative personnel. It’s a fantastic resource for giving a complete cannabis outsider a reasonable foundation on extracts and their production. Foundational knowledge is one of the most difficult and expensive things to provide in an on-the-job training situation, so it’s great to have somewhere to provide that without hours of one on ones. I’d also say it’s the perfect level of detail that someone who doesn’t have any background can absorb if they have a half a brain and any intention to learn. We require zubrick for everyone dishwasher and up in the lab, but this is much more approachable for a non-technically educated employee.
I will disclose that we won’t be paying anyone to take the test and actually get certified; partially because we’re a pretty bootstrap operation and partially because the ownership and production personnel will be making assessments of knowledge retention personally. If anyone cares to get certified, we’ll certainly encourage it but as a college drop out, I’m a firm believer that there’s a big difference between am education and a slip of paper that says you have one. I think that’s part of the point of providing the knowledge for free, but if y’all think I’m just cheap I don’t blame you lol. Big ups to @Future and @iLLnyeTheShatterGuy
18 Likes
Love this feedback! And 100% that’s why we provide the knowledge for free 
The underlying point of the GLGc is to level up the industry, so we love that you are using the handbook this way!
10 Likes
Feels a lot like pay me $50 and I will tell you whether or not you are good at extracting.
That’s what happens every time a buy a gram.
13 Likes
Absolutely the intent 
Foundation, then build into more specific/detailed information.
100%! Handbooks will be free, with the intent of helping those who want to learn.
Agreed. I’ve done multiple consults on general extraction info for retail locations (10-50 team members). This handbook is essentially what my presentations were for those companies. But now free 
8 Likes
How can I become apart of GLG
I’ll brand myself if I have to
GoodLifeGang.tech
3 Likes
I’ll hopefully be signing on 2022
Am I the only one that is having trouble with the chemical safety links in the handbook?
Got 1 question wrong! God dammit.
2 Likes
Yep, we’re here upstate keeping eye on the progress. Been hearing rumors through the association of provisional licensing going out first of the year.
totally see the need this is trying to address, and if there’s any group I want establishing a standard/cert system it’s this one.
I do wonder if it could ever reach the familiarity and power of ‘organic’, etc. as this is a issue/need more recognized by industry insiders than consumers. big scary pesticides and the harm they do is a much more well-known (and widely relevant, as everyone eats food, all day) than differences in CRC methods used on two cannabis products sitting next to each other on a shelf. this would take the average consumer doubling (tripling?) their knowledge of the processes involved in making their product, and cannabis consumers (especially American) are slow to educate. [see: indica/sativa]
this being said, I HOPE they reach that level of understanding and i definitely hope this has some legs! appreciate the intent and the work behind it. something like this has to exist and i think/hope/want this to have a shot at being the thing. it’ll take some years and i’ll be rooting for it.
I would second what someone said a bit back about considering dropping or replacing the ‘Gang’ word. even just dropping it leaves a tidy, brightly-worded, 3-initial label, like consider ‘Good Life Certified [GLc]’ vs ‘Good Life Gang Certified [GLGc]’ and the difference in marketability between them. i realize GLG already has a (well-earned) name in the biz and rebranding is a dubious thing, but for this to reach the masses i think the optics of that word making or breaking its chances can’t be underestimated. i’m an insider and even i’ve never been a fan of how that word rings
1 Like