scam: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1
Genuinely asking, not being difficult.
Everyone in c/reconstitution repeats that group buy is important. I believe it, but I have never seen anyone show why, and when I search I get 16 threads of people agreeing with each other.
Is there a paper? Is there a measurement? Or is this one of those things that is true because it has been repeated since 2023?
I am not trying to be the "source?" guy. I would just like a source.
best — the order this archive was captured in
evidence required, dated screenshots, metadata, order records, or independent test
Strongly agree. The dispute resolved and the record stayed updated.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is group buy. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is group buy.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
no doxxing, company registration is fine, individuals are not
Not to be pedantic but PDF metadata and exit scam are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
no doxxing, company registration is fine, individuals are not
the reship offer that never sends anything is worth noting
Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.
Strongly agree. The dispute resolved and the record stayed updated.
Slight fix: the number was 94.2, not 95.1. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
Can you post the PeptideMeter result that shows the problem?
Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.
a dispute resolves, edit the post and say so
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
no doxxing, company registration is fine, individuals are not
fake COAs always have the same tell: perfect results, zero variance
Did MKM respond or ghost you?
Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.
the QYB situation resolved, logged it here as resolved
Batch 17 appeared on WWB, ERP, and WWB claims it is raw material origin. Could be fine, could be reseller. Logged it in the directory.
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
PDF metadata said the COA was created in a browser four months after the date printed on the page. Worth flagging.
The cloned QSC store used our old homepage image from 2023. Reverse image search caught it in 19 seconds.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
a dispute resolves, edit the post and say so
- 1Strongly agree. The dispute resolved and the record stayed updated.16 comments in this branch · started by u/santiago_rasmussen
- 2Did MKM respond or ghost you?5 comments in this branch · started by u/bianca_demir