do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
❤️1
#vendor-verification 2026-05-21
Thursday62 messages13 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- VialBot — Channel stats, last 30 days: 127 messages from 59 members. 19:48
- VialBot — On this day 6 years ago this channel logged 118 messages. 19:56
- unsolicited_dm — i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier 20:20
- private_script_pri — a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel 21:21
- unsolicited_dm — the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not 21:38
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, n of 1 obviously
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine, i could be wrong
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, not advice obviously
coming back after 11 months, has the standard changed
blinded is better
pattern not one result
⚠️12
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log, n of 1 obviously
has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
🤝4👀6
not a recommendation
who decides, the mods or the room
Channel stats, last 30 days: 127 messages from 59 members.
🧪4📉3
while im here two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
On this day 6 years ago this channel logged 118 messages.
😂3📈7
quick one how many independent results does a supplier need
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record, ill dig out the number
genuine question nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
🤝16👍3😂2
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
update on the earlier thing how does a supplier get verification revoked
site-rotation-map.png
1000 × 700 · 893 KB · not retained in the public archive
nothing gets deleted
👀5
refresh on evidence
Channel stats, last 30 days: 103 messages from 26 members.
⚠️6
lot number or nothing
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
update from 26 months ago: SSA added evidence and the entry now reflects it
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
thats evidence
log it either way
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
coming back to this if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry, thats one data point
*that should say weekly
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
📉1👀11❤️18
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
does SSA being verified mean my vial is fine
post the photos
[edited]verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
❤️7📉4🎉3
21:40quiet.hours pinned a message to this channel
Batch lookup H-2814: 6 independent reports on file, earliest 2025-07-14.
Reminder for unsolicited_dm: dose day is today. Set 4 days ago.
pattern not one result
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
never for sale
| 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 |
both numbers go in
revoked stays in the log
thats not evidence
thats not evidence
never for sale
medutest-report-d-0718.pdf
3 pages · 673 KB · not retained in the public archive