cloned site is the most under-discussed thing in c/hplc
Something I noticed reading old threads that I have not seen said out loud.
The advice on PDF metadata in this community changed substantially around the start of last year, and nobody went back and updated the older posts. So depending on which thread the search engine hands you, you get two contradictory answers with the same confidence.
I have listed what I think the current consensus is below. Correct me — that is the point of posting it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
reseller scams versus fraud scams are different accusations
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.
This is evidence. The metadata is checkable and it is odd.
Batch 10 appeared on HJ, KP, and HJ claims it is raw material origin. Could be fine, could be reseller. Logged it in the directory.
reseller scams versus fraud scams are different accusations
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 56 weeks to accept.
Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.
Did SWB respond or ghost you?
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
the batch number appearing across three vendors is a red flag
cloned storefronts use old images, search for those
This is evidence. The metadata is checkable and it is odd.
the reship offer that never sends anything is worth noting
- 1Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.8 comments in this branch · started by u/ines_ekstrom
- 2reseller scams versus fraud scams are different accusations5 comments in this branch · started by u/milan_villalobos