what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
#vendor-verification 2025-07-03
Thursday48 messages12 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- seven_five_sweet — update from 19 months ago: Homopeptide added evidence and the entry now reflects it 21:06
- night_pin — what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises 21:17
- alcohol_hits — is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable 21:27
- seven_five_sweet — verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, from memory 22:20
- seven_five_sweet — a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel, i have it written down somewhere we refresh on new… 23:02
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
😂1
blinded is better
🧪4🧊4🔥12
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
✅1
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
nothing gets deleted
log it either way
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
lot number or nothing
update from 19 months ago: Homopeptide added evidence and the entry now reflects it
both numbers go in
📈1
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
refresh on evidence
💀2
genuine question how does a supplier get verification revoked
sorry to jump in we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
⚠️10
post the photos
never for sale
thin evidence
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
💀6🧊11👍13
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
genuine question a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
🎉1
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
thats evidence
follow up verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
revoked stays in the log
| 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 |
🧊15📈3👀18
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
sorry to jump in i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier, we shall see
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, from memory
🧊16
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
lot number or nothing
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
👍1
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
not a recommendation
sorry to jump in does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
🎉2
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel, i have it written down somewhere
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
🎉1🔥2
update from 26 months ago: QST added evidence and the entry now reflects it
thats not evidence
🧪14
Archive lookup: retention_time first appears in this channel on 2025-05-15.
does a good result from Medutest outweigh a bad one from Medutest
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution