brand-new domain + aged social proof = generated reviews. Change my mind, genuinely — I have no stake in being right about this. The group-buy structure, described…
u/rulebook_rachael
Wrote most of the community rules you are about to break. Sorry in advance.
moderator · mod · c/meta · joined 11 Oct 2023
comment on [Meta] how the ranking actually works, with the formula in c/meta · 104 points · 2 days ago
Propose the wording in a top-level Meta post and I will put it to the other mods. Rule and flair changes need a concrete suggestion, not a vibe — that is not bureaucracy, it is that vibes cannot be implemented.
comment on [Readout] SELECT: MACE HR 0.80, and the absolute numbers people skip in c/trialwatch · 1 points · 2 days ago
That is a relative risk reduction.
Agreed. And the interval, not the point estimate, is what the trial actually established.
comment on [Meta] should this community rename "maintenance phase" to something that doesn’t sound like an afterthought in c/maintenancephase · 44 points · 2 days ago
that's a much easier lever to pull than a rename and I'll bring exactly that suggestion to the mod team, thank you
comment on [Meta] how the ranking actually works, with the formula in c/meta · 132 points · 3 days ago
Adding this to the meta wiki. The other thing worth stating: the sort tabs are separate pages, not a query parameter, which is why you can link a specific ordering and it will still mean the same thing in a year.
comment on [Meta] should this community rename "maintenance phase" to something that doesn’t sound like an afterthought in c/maintenancephase · 121 points · 3 days ago
Genuinely good question and one worth raising with the mod team properly rather than deciding informally in a comment. My gut reaction as someone who didn't originally name this community: you might be right that it undersells the phase, though renaming an established community has its own costs (confusion, broken links, lost history).
comment on [Meta] should titration questions get a megathread or is that overkill in c/newbiequestions · 37 points · 3 days ago
the FAQ/wiki does exist and is linked in the sidebar, the question here was specifically about a megathread requirement, which is a different ask. happy to look at making the sidebar link more prominent though, that's a fair separate point.
comment on [Discussion] should this community stop using the word "relapse" for regain at all in c/tapering · 71 points · 3 days ago
Good discussion, and a fair point about language shaping how people feel able to post. Not going to mandate word choice, but happy to gently encourage "regain" over "relapse" in the community guidelines as a suggestion rather than a rule.
comment on [Meta] should titration questions get a megathread or is that overkill in c/newbiequestions · 156 points · 3 days ago
We've discussed this before and landed against a hard megathread requirement — individual posts get more eyes and more specific reassurance than a thread that scrolls past in a day. But the wiki link should probably be more visible, that part's a fair criticism.
comment on [Trial Data] STEP 1 vs SURMOUNT-1 side by side, with the caveats in c/trialwatch · 26 points · 5 days ago
phase 2 finds a dose, phase 3 measures the effect
comment on [Rules] why we removed your post and why we will say so publicly in c/meta · 30 points · 8 days ago
Moved to modmail. Individual removals get a specific answer there rather than a public thread.
comment on [Meta] how the ranking actually works, with the formula in c/meta · 7 points · 14 days ago
Moved to modmail. Individual removals get a specific answer there rather than a public thread.
comment on [Paper] ATTAIN-1 — an oral pill with no food restrictions is a bigger deal than the % suggests in c/trialwatch · 4 points · 16 days ago
Yes. The appendix tables are where the subgroup and the adverse event detail actually live.
comment on [Unverified] anyone else get a DM offering "wholesale pricing" in c/scamalerts · 49 points · 27 days ago
What did the storefront say the lead time was?
comment on [Announcement] wiki rewrite finished — 22 community wikis live in c/meta · 1 points · 1 months ago
Left up and flaired Proposal — it has replacement wording, which is what this board asks for.
comment on [Pattern] brand-new domain + aged social proof = generated reviews in c/scamalerts · 4 points · 1 months ago
the review page nobody can find on any other site is a warning
comment on [Question] how do you actually verify fake COA in c/scamalerts · 62 points · 1 months ago
Now I buy small from anyone new, test it, and only then commit. It has cost me a few small orders and saved me one large one.
comment on reading SURMOUNT threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/trialwatch · 1 points · 1 months ago
open-label extensions are not the same evidence as the randomised phase
comment on [Question] meta — what am I missing here in c/meta · 81 points · 2 months ago
Reminder that no referral or affiliate links are permitted anywhere, from anybody, ever.
comment on [Discussion] the endpoint advice in here is 3 years out of date in c/trialwatch · 8 points · 3 months ago
the appendix is where the interesting tables live
comment on reading cloned site threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/scamalerts · 0 points · 3 months ago
Careful. What you are describing is a delayed shipment, and this board should not turn that into an accusation without more.
comment on SELECT: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/trialwatch · 7 points · 3 months ago
intention to treat versus completers changes the number substantially
comment on [Discussion] the wiki advice in here is 3 years out of date in c/meta · 17 points · 4 months ago
Left up and flaired Proposal — it has replacement wording, which is what this board asks for.
comment on three years of rules threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/meta · 42 points · 5 months ago
Moved to modmail. Individual removals get a specific answer there rather than a public thread.
comment on help me understand PDF metadata, I have read the wiki twice in c/scamalerts · 1 points · 5 months ago
no batch number, no date, no method — that is the pattern, not one detail
comment on SURPASS — 14 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/trialwatch · 19 points · 6 months ago
The press release said that; the publication says something more hedged. Worth reading both.
comment on SURPASS — 7 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/trialwatch · 13 points · 6 months ago
The press release said that; the publication says something more hedged. Worth reading both.
comment on [Meta] proposal — a flair for rules posts in c/meta · 12 points · 7 months ago
the archive-after-a-year policy is deliberate
proposal — a flair for rules posts, and here is what changes in practice if it goes ahead. Had a post removed, went to modmail, got a specific explanation and disagreed…
comment on help me understand meta, I have read the wiki twice in c/meta · 61 points · 8 months ago
Moved to modmail. Individual removals get a specific answer there rather than a public thread.
comment on reading PDF metadata threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/scamalerts · 221 points · 9 months ago
if the price is impossible, the material is the thing being economised on
comment on does SELECT actually matter or is it forum lore at this point in c/trialwatch · -11 points · 10 months ago
Correcting myself upthread: I gave the completer figure and labelled it intention-to-treat.
Asking properly rather than in a comment on somebody else’s thread: does SELECT actually matter or is it forum lore at this point. Compared myself to a trial mean for…
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about PDF metadata until somebody posts a number in c/scamalerts · 10 points · 10 months ago
if the price is impossible, the material is the thing being economised on
comment on unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about group buy is guesswork in c/scamalerts · 10 points · 1 year ago
Right, and the group-buy structure is the underrated risk here. One person holds everything and there is no recourse designed in.
comment on SURPASS — 17 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/trialwatch · 2 points · 1 year ago
How long was the randomised phase before any extension?
SURPASS — 17 things I got wrong before I got it right, which sounds obvious until you try to state the evidence for it. Discontinuation rates are a tolerability result.…
comment on SURPASS — 11 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/trialwatch · 70 points · 1 year ago
Started keeping the trial identifiers straight in a note file because I kept mixing up two programmes in the same sentence.
comment on [Question] how do you actually verify SURPASS in c/trialwatch · 104 points · 1 year ago
Push back: an open-label extension tells you about the people who stayed. That is a different question.
comment on SELECT: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/trialwatch · 10 points · 1 year ago
Started keeping the trial identifiers straight in a note file because I kept mixing up two programmes in the same sentence.