GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Archived. This submission is more than a year old. Votes and new comments are closed, and some of the advice in it may have been superseded — check the community wiki for the current version.
0
c/meta·posted 1 year ago by u/blunt_coldbox29

how much of what we believe about moderation actually comes from disclosure threads

Announcement

how much of what we believe about moderation actually comes from disclosure threads. If this has been answered properly somewhere, link me and I will delete.

Sorted by controversial for a week and found four of the best threads I have read here.

Had a post removed, went to modmail, got a specific explanation and disagreed with it politely. It stayed removed and I understood why.

Read the ranking formula out of scepticism and reproduced the ordering in a spreadsheet. It does what it says.

Sceptical readings welcome. The confident ones are the ones I distrust.

0 up / 0 down48% upvoted4 commentsid 196qyx31 May 2025

4 comments

4 in this archive, depth 2

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/arto_fonseca6 points·1 year ago

The evidence standard on the vendor boards requires a document, a date or a named service behind any claim about a supplier. It is what makes those threads worth reading years later.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ines_boateng3 points·1 year ago

I would not archive earlier. The old threads are the most-searched thing on the site.

replysharereportpermalink
u/yusuf_achebe4 points·1 year ago

Checked the sponsor disclosure because I assumed it would be vague. It was extremely specific and slightly boring.

replysharereportpermalink
u/dilara_nyberg-8 points·1 year ago

the ranking formula is published, go and read it

replysharereportpermalink
About c/meta

Site governance in public: rule changes, moderation decisions and appeals, how the ranking works, wiki maintenance, sponsor disclosure, and the periodic argument about whether c/vendorvetting evidence standards are too strict. They are not.

23kmembers
62submissions
Aug 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
More in c/meta
c/meta rules
  1. Moderation appeals go through modmail first; Meta is for policy, not individual cases.
  2. Rule-change proposals need a concrete wording suggestion.
  3. Sponsor and disclosure questions are always answered publicly.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/hub_opsu/mod_ambulatoryu/rulebook_rachaelu/quiet_moderator
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →