i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
[edited]#vendor-verification 2025-11-24
Monday39 messages10 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- vial_ledger — sorry to jump in blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs 16:55
- vial_ledger — a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record, not advice obviously 19:29
- taipei_tare — we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry 19:52
- salt_bridge — somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log 21:55
thats not evidence
has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
Verification log updated: KP — evidence added, status unchanged.
sorry to jump in blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
✅15⚠️5🧊1
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
quick one what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
refresh on evidence
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes, not advice obviously
lot number or nothing
thats evidence
post the photos
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
Purity check: no report on file for lot C-4402. Nothing logged either way.
🧊1
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
🙏2🎉14🔥9
while im here how many independent results does a supplier need
while im here two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
auckland_aliquotthe mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which…
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
genuine question if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution, take that with a pinch of salt
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record, not advice obviously
🤝17❤️3
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
🎉4🤝2
does a good result from Medutest outweigh a bad one from VendorInvestigate
[edited]the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
update from 20 months ago: KP added evidence and the entry now reflects it
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
🙏18❤️1
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
😂1
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
🔥6
revoked stays in the log
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
👀18🤝2📈10
blinded is better
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
log it either way