#vendor-verification 2026-05-30

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

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

update from 12 months ago: QYB added evidence and the entry now reflects it

sorry to jump in if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score

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

coming back to this why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored

what actually counts as evidence for a verification

is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable

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

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

thats not evidence

is there a version of the log i can read chronologically

a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel, ask me again in a month

who decides, the mods or the room

a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record

blinded is better

if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution

thats evidence

the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line, not advice obviously

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

has anyone ever offered to pay for verification