[Vendor] QST order #16 — Denmark, 23 days, no drama, receipts inside
Confession thread, sort of.
I went from 0.5mg to 12.5mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 6 weeks later, at which point I had no way of knowing whether the dose increase did anything or whether it would have broken anyway.
So now I have constipation I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.
Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 24 reads it before doing the same thing.
best — the order this archive was captured in
USDC exists on 16 networks, vendor credits are network-specific
escrow for group buys is standard, use it
Slight fix: the number was 97.2, not 97.4. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
Yeah, the network selection matters most.
never post a wallet address, not yours, not a vendor's
Strongly agree. Escrow is non-negotiable for groups.
network selection matters, wrong chain is the expensive typo
USDC exists on 18 networks, vendor credits are network-specific
no price talk, no tickers, no investment discussion
USDC exists on 18 networks, vendor credits are network-specific
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
never post a wallet address, not yours, not a vendor's
gas versus discount arithmetic is real
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
This is correct. Gas fees are real costs.
memo/tag requirements differ by network
no group-buy recruitment, discussing how they fail is fine
Strongly agree. Escrow is non-negotiable for groups.
escrow for group buys is standard, use it
escrow for group buys is standard, use it
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 88 weeks to accept.
the 21% discount versus 7% network fees
no group-buy recruitment, discussing how they fail is fine
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Did you check confirmation speed on that chain?
network selection matters, wrong chain is the expensive typo
network selection matters, wrong chain is the expensive typo
Adding to this: escrow is doing more work than the comment implies.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
- 1Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next…9 comments in this branch · started by u/ledger_mod
- 2no group-buy recruitment, discussing how they fail is fine6 comments in this branch · started by u/lipid_panel_larry