the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
#vendor-verification 2025-09-27
Saturday18 messages4 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- nine_nine_one — verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, not advice obviously 11:24
- satiety_sig — quick one a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all 11:25
- nine_nine_one — what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises 12:45
- satiety_sig — does a good result from VendorInvestigate outweigh a bad one from VendorInvestigate 12:49
- taper_tess — a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, i could be wrong 13:59
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, not advice obviously
🤝2✅11🧊15
quick one a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
⚠️1
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
coming back to this verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
log it either way
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
thats not evidence
does a good result from VendorInvestigate outweigh a bad one from VendorInvestigate
🤝1👍2🙏16
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
pattern not one result
❤️8
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
*that should say weekly
mhra_unlicensedif the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than…
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, i could be wrong