[Announcement] sponsor disclosure, in full, again, because someone asked
Confession thread, sort of.
I went from 0.25mg to 10mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 4 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 sulphur burps I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.
Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 89 reads it before doing the same thing.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
the periodic argument about meta standards
the periodic argument about moderation standards
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
rule-change proposals need concrete wording
This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.
I am going to push back on this slightly.
moderation appeals go through modmail first
moderation appeals go through modmail first
Disagree on that part. 93.7% and 99.3% on the same vial is normal.
sponsor and disclosure questions are always answered publicly
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
- 1Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell…8 comments in this branch · started by u/blunt_coldbox29