post the photos
#vendor-verification 2024-11-14
Thursday37 messages10 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- VialBot — New independent result logged — BCH, lot C-4402, purity 99% (PeptideMeter). 18:43
- luerlok — right so if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score 20:41
- batch_variance — how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing 20:42
not a recommendation
👍4
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier, happy to be corrected
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
both numbers go in
how many independent results does a supplier need
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
New independent result logged — BCH, lot C-4402, purity 99% (PeptideMeter).
🧪6❤️18
nothing gets deleted
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
who decides, the mods or the room
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
blinded is better
💀9📉2🧊1
lot number or nothing
❤️2🎉18✅3
On this day 9 years ago this channel logged 119 messages.
thin evidence
revoked stays in the log
does a good result from Janoshik outweigh a bad one from Janoshik
how does a supplier get verification revoked
👍8
thats evidence
[edited]a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log, happy to be corrected
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
never for sale
🔥18🎉7❤️10
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, i could be wrong
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
✅3
pattern not one result
thats not evidence
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
right so if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
😂4💀10❤️14
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
🙏13👍2
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line, thats just me
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
refresh on evidence
log it either way