if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
update from 5 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
#test-results 2025-05-14
Wednesday36 messages8 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- nine_nine_one — whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next 13:18
- nine_nine_one — a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier, i have it written down somewhere 13:29
- cagri_curious — my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure 15:34
- cagri_curious — posting my VendorInvestigate result on lot G-0641, what do people make of it 17:31
- quiet_head_qi — does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier 17:36
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
log the lot number
Purity check: no report on file for lot E-2205. Nothing logged either way.
coming back after 24 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
🤝1
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
🧪2📈17
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier, i have it written down somewhere
🤝1👍8
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
log the boring ones
whats the lot
🎉2❤️4👀5
do you test every order or sample it
log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture
weigh it first
thats within range
📉17💀9👀3
is anyone tracking results over time in a way they would share
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
one data point
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern, i could be wrong
🧊1📈2👀3
which lab
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
when did you buy it
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
certificate said 96.8 and the independent came back 99.4, is that a problem
Purity check: no report on file for lot A-2418. Nothing logged either way.
my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
🤝11✅9🔥3
thats not great
selection bias
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
nice result
posting my VendorInvestigate result on lot G-0641, what do people make of it
🧪3👀5
thats a fill problem
📈10💀5🤝4
is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure
does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier
📈9