how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
#vendor-verification 2026-04-10
Friday45 messages7 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
post the photos
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern, your mileage will differ
does a good result from Medutest outweigh a bad one from Medutest
👀1
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
both numbers go in
📈3🎉13
refresh on evidence
🤝7🧊2🎉1
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
who decides, the mods or the room
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
never for sale
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
genuine question how many independent results does a supplier need
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
update from 24 months ago: FGP added evidence and the entry now reflects it
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all, n of 1 obviously
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
for the archive do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
✅5
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
for the archive has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine, thats one data point
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
| 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 |
🙏6
coming back after 1 months, has the standard changed
🧊3🙏9
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
how does a supplier get verification revoked
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
❤️14
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers, take that with a pinch of salt
⚠️9
pattern not one result
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited, someone check my working
thin evidence
fridge-temps.csv
405 rows · not retained in the public archive
not a recommendation
revoked stays in the log
⚠️12📉1🎉15
blinded is better