thats evidence
👍2🧊1
#vendor-verification 2025-12-06
Saturday26 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- belfast_bac — two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in… 19:17
- hair_month_four — does TFC being verified mean my vial is fine 20:12
- vacuum_vic — we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern 20:34
- plateau_pen — update from 14 months ago: BCH added evidence and the entry now reflects it 22:20
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
post the photos
how many independent results does a supplier need
🧪1👍1
sorry to jump in verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, not advice obviously
who decides, the mods or the room
🧪4🤝1
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
does a good result from PeptideMeter outweigh a bad one from Janoshik
coming back to this blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
log it either way
🧪9📈1🎉5
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
right so how does a supplier get verification revoked
does TFC being verified mean my vial is fine
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
| 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 |
lot number or nothing
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
update on the earlier thing a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all, take that with a pinch of salt
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
update from 14 months ago: BCH added evidence and the entry now reflects it
🤝1
slightly off topic but if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution, we shall see
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry, we shall see
both numbers go in