what actually counts as evidence for a verification
#vendor-verification 2025-11-27
Thursday14 messages3 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- bea_reconstitutes — update from 9 months ago: QST added evidence and the entry now reflects it 19:56
- bea_reconstitutes — a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all, ymmv 20:00
- nadia_notes — somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter… 20:34
post the photos
update from 9 months ago: QST added evidence and the entry now reflects it
refresh on evidence
thats not evidence
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all, ymmv
📈2🧊15
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
🎉1
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
[edited]*PeptideMeter not the other one
not a recommendation
👍2❤️3😂1