ok so a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
🔥11✅14💀1
#vendor-verification 2025-05-31
Saturday49 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- eat_more_please — ok so a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both 18:56
- salt_bridge — we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry 20:56
- tokyo_taper — the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division 21:08
- salt_bridge — blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs, we shall see 21:34
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
how does a supplier get verification revoked
👍11🧊1
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not, your mileage will differ
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
nothing gets deleted
log it either way
❤️3🎉1
pattern not one result
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
💀8
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
🤝13😂2
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
revoked stays in the log
thin evidence
19:36ferrous_ash pinned a message to this channel
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
thats not evidence
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
how many independent results does a supplier need
who decides, the mods or the room
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
update from 10 months ago: SSA added evidence and the entry now reflects it
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
✅3💀2📉2
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
not a recommendation
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
📈16🧊9😂17
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
🙏3🤝9📉3
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
| 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 referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
while im here a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
follow up a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
vial-c-4402-front.png
900 × 1200 · 752 KB · not retained in the public archive
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs, we shall see
👍8❤️11
coming back after 13 months, has the standard changed
📈2
does GGPeps being verified mean my vial is fine
[edited]refresh on evidence
post the photos
update on the earlier thing we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern, from memory
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
thats evidence
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
update on the earlier thing is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
lot number or nothing
📉1
never for sale
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record