coming back to this the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division, we shall see
#vendor-verification 2024-10-30
Wednesday25 messages5 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- tenpence — is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation 20:33
- vial_ledger — verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, happy to be corrected 20:40
- food_noise_off — for the archive a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited, thats one data point 21:58
does QYB being verified mean my vial is fine
slightly off topic but what actually counts as evidence for a verification
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, ymmv
quick one if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
pattern not one result
thin evidence
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs, happy to be corrected
lot number or nothing
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
😂11🧊18👀1
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
sorry to jump in update from 19 months ago: QYB added evidence and the entry now reflects it
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, happy to be corrected
| Evidence | Counts? |
|---|---|
| Independent report, lot you bought, lot number legible | yes |
| Independent report, no lot number | no |
| Supplier certificate only | no |
| Screenshot of a report | no |
| Blinded pooled submission | yes, for the pool |
| A friend who said it was fine | no |
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
both numbers go in
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
✅1📈1
genuine question if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
for the archive a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited, thats one data point
💀14
genuine question we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry, still working it out
follow up has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
how many independent results does a supplier need
coming back after 12 months, has the standard changed