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 meta — 21 things I got wrong before I got it right — 15 comments in the full submission. View in context.
82
c/meta·submitted 1 year ago by u/joaquin_wojcik

meta — 21 things I got wrong before I got it right

Rulesbranch of 6 comments

meta — 21 things I got wrong before I got it right, and I am aware this is a minority view on this board. How a rule actually changes here, since people assume it is arbitrary. Somebody posts a proposal with replacement wording — not a complaint, actual text. It gets argued about, usually for a week or two. If it…

Read the full submission and all 15 comments →

This branch

6 comments, started 1 year ago
u/camila_kowalski8 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
u/enzo_fonseca6 points·1 year ago

Disagree with loosening that. The evidence rule is why a supplier report here means something.

replysharereportpermalink
u/katrin_diallo9 points·1 year ago

the ranking formula is published, go and read it

replysharereportpermalink
u/mod_ambulatoryadmin3 points·1 year ago

the ranking formula is published, go and read it

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/katrin_diallo1 point·1 year ago

rule-change proposals need a concrete wording, not a complaint

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_fonseca2 points·1 year ago·edited

Yes — a proposal with concrete wording gets discussed. A complaint about the rules in general does not.

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

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
More in c/meta
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.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/hub_opsu/mod_ambulatoryu/rulebook_rachaelu/quiet_moderator
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.

Full disclaimer →