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 Votes and new comments are closed, and some of the advice in it may have been superseded — check the community wiki for the current version.
121
c/meta·posted 1 year ago by u/dario_petrescu

three years of meta threads, summarised so you do not have to read them

Announcement

Something I keep coming back to: three years of meta threads, summarised so you do not have to read them.

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

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

Argued against the strict evidence rule for a year. Then read a supplier thread on another site and stopped arguing.

Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.

176 up / 55 down76% upvoted19 commentsid 1b4o6s9 May 2025

19 comments

17 in this archive, depth 4

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/yusuf_achebe10 points·1 year 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/sanne_laurent7 points·1 year ago

Agreed. Publishing the ranking formula is the difference between a feed and a black box, and it costs nothing to do.

replysharereportpermalink
u/dario_petrescu5 points·1 year ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/dose_creep_dan1 point·1 year ago·edited

I would not archive earlier.

Agreed — concrete wording or it is not a proposal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sterile_field_steph2 points·1 year ago

the ranking formula is published, go and read it

replysharereportpermalink
u/hamza_weiss5 points·1 year ago

Agreed.

Disagreeing with this bit: making individual cases public by default is worse for the person being moderated.

replysharereportpermalink
u/dario_petrescuOP5 points·1 year ago

no referral links, no affiliate links, not once

replysharereportpermalink
u/arto_fonseca4 points·1 year ago·edited

Careful — that would make individual moderation cases public by default, which is worse for the person complaining.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ice_pack_auditcold chain6 points·1 year ago

The ranking functions are published: the hot ordering combines score magnitude with age, and the controversial ordering weights total volume by the balance between up and down votes. Both are reproducible from the numbers on each submission.

replysharereportpermalink
[removed]4 points·1 year ago

[removed by moderator]

replysharereportpermalink
u/dexa_twice_yearlybody comp1 point·1 year ago

That is a complaint rather than a proposal. Bring wording and it can actually be discussed.

replysharereportpermalink
u/maren_baptista5 points·1 year ago

sponsor disclosure is on the about page in full

replysharereportpermalink
u/hub_opsMOD4 points·1 year ago

Reminder that no referral or affiliate links are permitted anywhere, from anybody, ever.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sterile_field_steph1 point·1 year ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/blunt_coldbox291 point·1 year ago

this place sells nothing and takes nothing from any supplier

replysharereportpermalink
u/dario_petrescuOP2 points·1 year ago

nobody here is paid, including the moderators

replysharereportpermalink
u/joaquin_ivaturi2 points·1 year ago·edited

sort by controversial occasionally, it is worth it

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
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

Janoshik Analytical

Independent HPLC and mass spec. The number you get is the number they found.

janoshik.com
Sponsored

GL Biochem (Shanghai)

Custom peptides and amino acids direct from the manufacturer since 1998. ISO 9001 / cGMP. Batch COA every order.

glbiochem.net
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.