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?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Discussion] we are measuring moderation at the wrong time and calling it noise — 27 comments in the full submission. View in context.
735
c/meta·submitted 2 months ago by u/yusuf_achebe

[Discussion] we are measuring moderation at the wrong time and calling it noise

Discussionbranch of 10 comments

Thinking out loud about this: we are measuring moderation at the wrong time and calling it noise. Funding and links, in full, because the question deserves a straight answer. Sponsor units are labelled as sponsored. Each vendor source page carries one outbound link to that supplier’s own storefront, marked nofollow…

Read the full submission and all 27 comments →

This branch

10 comments, started 1 months ago
u/lina_ndiaye116 points·1 months 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/yusuf_achebeOP168 points·1 months ago

Edited a wiki page for the first time and nothing bad happened, which is apparently the point.

replysharereportpermalink
u/dexa_twice_yearlybody comp48 points·1 months ago

Which rule specifically, and which part of it?

replysharereportpermalink
u/hassan_castellanos11 points·1 months ago

Is this about a policy or about an individual removal?

replysharereportpermalink
u/dario_ibarra-33 points·1 months ago

Moderation of individual cases happens in modmail rather than in threads, because a public discussion of one person’s removal is worse for that person than a private one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_danquah1 point·1 months ago

modmail first, always, and the thread second

replysharereportpermalink
u/divya_bakken-48 points·1 months ago

the wiki is editable by anybody with standing on the site

replysharereportpermalink
u/yusuf_achebeOP87 points·1 months ago

sort by controversial occasionally, it is worth it

replysharereportpermalink
u/marta_trevino71 points·1 months ago

the disclosure is boring because it has to be

replysharereportpermalink
u/lina_ndiaye38 points·1 months ago

sort by controversial occasionally, it is worth it

Adding the practical note — the formula is published and you can reproduce the ordering yourself.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

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

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
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.
Moderators
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.