nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
#vendor-verification 2026-05-10
Sunday33 messages8 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- mhra_unlicensed — a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all 11:11
- typosquat_tay — update from 6 months ago: QSC added evidence and the entry now reflects it 11:14
- mhra_unlicensed — is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes 12:21
- mhra_unlicensed — what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers 12:25
- warsaw_vial — has anyone ever offered to pay for verification 15:19
never for sale
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
how many independent results does a supplier need
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
🧊14
both numbers go in
update from 6 months ago: QSC added evidence and the entry now reflects it
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
thats not evidence
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
*Medutest not the other one
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited, someone check my working
blinded is better
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
| 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
pattern not one result
what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
❤️1👀6
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs, someone check my working
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
[edited]👍2
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
revoked stays in the log
📈2
thats evidence
does a good result from Medutest outweigh a bad one from Janoshik
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
Testing queue: 5 submissions open, 39 awaiting dispatch.
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
👀9📈2⚠️17
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
Recon calculator: 15mg in 2.5ml = 10mg/ml.
for the archive how does a supplier get verification revoked
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score