verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
#vendor-verification 2026-01-28
Wednesday44 messages8 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- still_here_2024 — what actually counts as evidence for a verification 21:04
- ari_arrives — update from 23 months ago: MKM added evidence and the entry now reflects it 21:40
- tallinn_taper — how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor 21:51
- ari_arrives — a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all 22:40
- thank_you_year_on — the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division 22:41
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
🧪7
lot number or nothing
quick one does a good result from Medutest outweigh a bad one from VendorInvestigate
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier, i think
[edited]thank_you_year_onquick one does a good result from Medutest outweigh a bad one from VendorInvestigate
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
does Homopeptide being verified mean my vial is fine
not a recommendation
coming back after 19 months, has the standard changed
thats not evidence
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
nothing gets deleted
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
update from 23 months ago: MKM added evidence and the entry now reflects it
📉2📈9
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
✅10🎉8
thin evidence
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
ok so we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
💀1
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
thats evidence
✅4
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
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 long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
update on the earlier thing the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
unrelated but verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
blinded is better
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
👍5🙏2
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
📈15🙏1📉1
coming back to this both numbers go in
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
❤️1
pattern not one result
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
revoked stays in the log
👀1💀8
post the photos
update on the earlier thing both numbers go in