nothing gets deleted
#vendor-verification 2025-03-15
Saturday28 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- verify_or_dont — a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is… 20:42
- tenpence — verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, i think 21:01
- tenpence — for the archive two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers, still working it out 21:03
- tenpence — a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both 21:33
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
⚠️9💀1
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
how many independent results does a supplier need
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern, from memory
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
✅1🤝17🔥5
does a good result from PeptideMeter outweigh a bad one from Medutest
not a recommendation
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
update on the earlier thing verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, i think
💀17
for the archive two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers, still working it out
transit-times.csv
137 rows · not retained in the public archive
coming back after 19 months, has the standard changed
refresh on evidence
👍1💀9👀5
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
site-rotation-map.png
1000 × 700 · 136 KB · not retained in the public archive
lot number or nothing
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score, someone check my working
coming back to this a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
both numbers go in
⚠️3
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
update from 20 months ago: QYB added evidence and the entry now reflects it
😂1
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line, we shall see
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises