verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
#vendor-verification 2025-12-07
Sunday63 messages12 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- vial_ledger — genuine question the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division 15:51
- reship_rita — somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log 17:38
- cass_cagri — a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about… 18:30
- typosquat_tay — is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable 19:54
follow up a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
😂1
thin evidence
lot number or nothing
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
revoked stays in the log
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
✅12
does a good result from PeptideMeter outweigh a bad one from Medutest
nothing gets deleted
post the photos
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
thats evidence
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
both numbers go in
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all, take that with a pinch of salt
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes, i could be wrong
transit-times.csv
138 rows · not retained in the public archive
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
update from 24 months ago: ERP added evidence and the entry now reflects it
genuine question 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 |
🙏7👍4💀9
refresh on evidence
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
how many independent results does a supplier need
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
coming back after 9 months, has the standard changed
log it either way
⚠️1🤝5🧪2
not a recommendation
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
[edited]quick one how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
thats not evidence
blinded is better
📉13👍2📈16
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
👍15👀4
ok so how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
[edited]pattern not one result
not a recommendation
pattern not one result
never for sale
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
📉12🎉12
follow up nothing gets deleted, ill dig out the number
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
how does a supplier get verification revoked
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
blinded is better
post the photos
🎉4👍1
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
💀11🧊12
what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
log it either way, someone check my working
ok so thin evidence, ymmv
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
thats evidence
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones