update from 4 months ago: QYB added evidence and the entry now reflects it
🧊1🧪1
#vendor-verification 2026-06-13
Saturday54 messages11 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- ghent_gradient — blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs 08:18
- month_six_me — what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine 08:36
- month_six_me — nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes 09:02
- area_percent — a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both 10:12
- area_percent — why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored 10:14
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division, happy to be corrected
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
thin evidence
📉6
not a recommendation
pattern not one result
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
for the archive what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
never for sale
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
📈16👀14💀10
while im here who decides, the mods or the room
[edited]two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
*Janoshik not the other one
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
blinded is better
[edited]what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
📉11
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
coming back to this 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
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
❤️5📉10👍4
thats not evidence
🧪3🎉6
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
coming back after 21 months, has the standard changed
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
🧊12🙏1
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
🤝14👍7📈1
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel, from memory
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
both numbers go in
🔥15
thats evidence
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
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
🧪1👀5
nothing gets deleted
post the photos
🙏8
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
👍10
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
refresh on evidence
🤝12
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
lot number or nothing
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
not a recommendation
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
revoked stays in the log, still working it out
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
🎉6
slightly off topic but both numbers go in