update from 23 months ago: SWB added evidence and the entry now reflects it
#vendor-verification 2025-10-27
Monday22 messages7 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- peak_split — i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count 19:03
- peak_split — what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises 19:16
- ollie_orders — is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation 20:42
- assay_not_purity — a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited 20:44
- hk_hplc — follow up if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution 21:18
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
| 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 |
thin evidence
[edited]what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
🧊17
*PeptideMeter not the other one
genuine question a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
while im here how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
❤️2🎉9
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
🔥5🧊1💀8
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
follow up if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
❤️3💀2
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, take that with a pinch of salt
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
🧪1
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
pattern not one result
📉1🧊14
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
revoked stays in the log
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
[edited]🧊3