a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
#vendor-verification 2026-05-02
Saturday54 messages10 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- blind_submit — we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry 13:40
- bex_bloods — what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine 17:24
- wrong_network — a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel 18:01
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
👀3🧪11😂1
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
unrelated but who decides, the mods or the room
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited, happy to be corrected
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
revoked stays in the log
🧊1
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern, your mileage will differ
log it either way
refresh on evidence
unrelated but verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
quick one what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
🤝4⚠️4
post the photos
vial-c-4402-front.png
900 × 1200 · 369 KB · not retained in the public archive
📈5
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
*VendorInvestigate not the other one
lot number or nothing
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
while im here two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
❤️11📉2
coming back after 9 months, has the standard changed
blinded is better
nothing gets deleted
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
thin evidence
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
🤝1
*PeptideMeter not the other one
update on the earlier thing what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
pattern not one result
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
not a recommendation
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
never for sale
does MKM being verified mean my vial is fine
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
update from 7 months ago: MKM added evidence and the entry now reflects it
thats not evidence
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
how many independent results does a supplier need
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
❤️18
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
while im here if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
📈3💀1👍8
post the photos
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
thats evidence
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs, someone check my working
both numbers go in
[edited]verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
| 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 |
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all