I strongly encourage Members to hold all sources accountable. The best way to do that is to request, pressure, and demand (repeatedly and aggressively) that they conduct more lab testing on their products in the name of harm reduction.
I see absolutely no reason that anyone should discourage or otherwise prevent a Member from doing this under any circumstance. Anyone who defends sources against such requests is thwarting the community harm reduction efforts.
If there are any reasons, valid or not, that the source should not perform such analytical testing, the onus should be fully on the source to explain those reasons.
Sources should directly address the issue of refusing to perform lab tests (whether it's specific testing or frequency).
It is NOT the job of source sympathizers, sycophants, dickriders, etc. to defend the sources, represent the sources, or absolve the sources of any responsibility for not testing their products. Anyone who does this undermines the goals of a forum that prides itself on harm reduction.
Sources who extensively test their products provide a valuable harm reduction service. It's not nearly as valuable as independent member testing but does help hold them accountable.
But make no mistake, sources who lab test their products are doing so due to marketing pressures - it has become a cost of doing business required in the community. It is not an act of altruism but self-serving and profit-oriented.
We should appreciate members who contribute to lab testing at every level. But let's don't make it a moral issue or use it disparage or discredit those who are not in a position to spend money on testing.
