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 disclosure — 16 things I got wrong before I got it right — 55 comments in the full submission. View in context.
1.3k
c/meta·submitted 2 years ago by u/enzo_danquah

disclosure — 16 things I got wrong before I got it right

Metabranch of 8 comments

Posting this as a discussion rather than a claim: disclosure — 16 things I got wrong before I got it right. Submissions older than a year are archived: readable, linkable, and closed to new comments. That keeps a three-year-old thread from being reopened with a reply nobody will see in context. Vendor source pages…

Read the full submission and all 55 comments →

This branch

8 comments, started 2 years ago
u/old_account_2023267 points·2 years ago·edited

A rule-change proposal needs replacement wording because that is what can be evaluated. Without it there is nothing to compare against the current text.

replysharereportpermalink
u/blunt_coldbox_2024114 points·2 years ago

Correction: that rule applies to the vendor boards specifically, not site-wide. The wording is on the rules page.

replysharereportpermalink
u/emil_wojcik78 points·2 years ago

Not convinced by the proposal as worded. It would remove the specific thing that makes the vendor board usable.

replysharereportpermalink
u/anders_karlsen158 points·2 years ago

no referral links, no affiliate links, not once

replysharereportpermalink
u/dizzy_on_standing38 points·2 years ago

no referral links, no affiliate links, not once

anders_karlsen is right that the strict evidence rule is the asset, not the friction.

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_danquahOP21 points·2 years ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_danquahOP74 points·2 years ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/RetaAndRegret2223 points·2 years ago

Cosigning on the no-links rule. It is the only reason the pricing threads are trustworthy.

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.