vialroom

#vendor-verification 2026-01-04

Sunday33 messages7 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
  • quiet_head_qi — while im here nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with… 11:11
  • lot_number_lou — we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern 12:25
  • lot_number_lou — coming back to this update from 6 months ago: MKM added evidence and the entry now reflects it a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is… 16:44
NF

the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division

U1

verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more

is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation

🎉3
GC

a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both

QH

while im here nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted

🧪12

has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation

the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not

NF

verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted

LN

we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern

🤝15🧪116
EA

what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine

U1

unrelated but we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry, happy to be corrected

does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything

who decides, the mods or the room

🎉5
QH

quick one i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier

QH

verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently

TT

somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log

LN

a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited

U1

slightly off topic but a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all

U1

blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs

pattern not one result

a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel

🧪2🤝2🔥5