a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
weights-monthly.csv
737 rows · not retained in the public archive
#vendor-verification 2026-06-25
Thursday26 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- dexa_or_bia — a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel 19:05
- reship_rita — for the archive what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises 19:18
- reship_rita — verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, someone check my working 19:19
- VialBot — Archive lookup: tb500_tobias first appears in this channel on 2026-04-17. 22:03
thats evidence
for the archive what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
peptidemeter-summary-h-2814.pdf
2 pages · 96 KB · not retained in the public archive
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, someone check my working
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
not a recommendation
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
follow up verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
pattern not one result
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
post the photos
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
coming back after 15 months, has the standard changed
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
refresh on evidence
who decides, the mods or the room
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
how does a supplier get verification revoked
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all, from memory
what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
Archive lookup: tb500_tobias first appears in this channel on 2026-04-17.
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division