Sending AAS samples to independent, accredited laboratory in Europe

[Millard]

Large source operations may be able to alter the pass/fail statistics quite a bit. You might need to limit how often a source's products can be sent in.

Please elaborate on this.

 

[flenser]

I've considered the shill problem. Do you think requiring a minimum number of points or likes would solve it for the most part?

Having said that, the likes system is not perfect since @Astro Labs has more likes than most members. There's something wrong with that picture especially when you look at the valuable contributors below his name. Members need to re-evaluate their relationship with sources. No source should be on that list.

It will probably be a moving target. The shill is a determined individual. They will keep finding loopholes and we will keep closing them.

We also have to consider source to source attacks. Submission of bunk gear with another source's label. Once this happens a few times, no one will trust test results for gear sent in by new members. The limiting criteria might not be fully controllable by any set of specific rules.

 

[whodatnation]

Likes would be a good start Millard and as with this whole endeavor we can evolve as we move forward. I would think a anonymous board of trustees here could also help with decisions. With that board always being rotated with who's actually on it.

I've considered the shill problem. Do you think requiring a minimum number of points or likes would solve it for the most part?

Having said that, the likes system is not perfect since @Astro Labs has more likes than most members. There's something wrong with that picture especially when you look at the valuable contributors below his name. Members need to re-evaluate their relationship with sources. No source should be on that list.

 

[flenser]

Please elaborate on this.

I just realized small labs are not really at a disadvantage here. As long as they can flood the test environment with shill members, they can change the odds on who gets to send samples for that source's products. The shills get the legit gear, and everyone else gets under dosed gear.

 

[whodatnation]

No doubt that this will be an issue and exactly why the credibility of who sent in samples would greatly influence any of my decisions.

It will probably be a moving target. The shill is a determined individual. They will keep finding loopholes and we will keep closing them.

We also have to consider source to source attacks. Submission of bunk gear with another source's label. Once this happens a few times, no one will trust test results for gear sent in by new members. The limiting criteria might not be fully controllable by any set of specific rules.

 

[Millard]

While submission will be anonymously discussions between us on who sent what and from where will always hold the most value when it's coming from trusted members . While anyone can send samples when someone such as yourself says you sent compound whatever and the results are this, would hold more weight to me then any random testing.

Trusted members (i.e. those with significant influence) aren't necessarily the best individuals to send in samples. I don't think an admin/mod, no matter how trusted or highly regarded, should be the first choice to submit samples. Those are the guys who always get the best products, the best service and preferential treatment. Sources know they have influence and source know to treat them well. This will be especially true if the "trusted members" are the ones responsible for submitting samples for testing. As @flenser said, the likelihood that they will be "selectively not-scammed" is very high.

The only way for these guys to avoid this is to create an additional, unrelated handle and address that is not linked to their better-known pseudonym.

It's not that the trusted members are not trustworthy. It's that sources are eager to exploit the community's trust in those members for their own purposes.

Thanks for the vote of trust. I think the numbers Millard has been tossing around would be a definite game changer in many ways. One would be the influence of the "trusted" vet would be severely limited against a swarm of random test results.

 

[johnnyBALLZ]

Trusted members (i.e. those with significant influence) aren't necessarily the best individuals to send in samples. I don't think an admin/mod, no matter how trusted or highly regarded, should be the first choice to submit samples. Those are the guys who always get the best products, the best service and preferential treatment. Sources know they have influence and source know to treat them well. This will be especially true if the "trusted members" are the ones responsible for submitting samples for testing. As @flenser said, the likelihood that they will be "selectively not-scammed" is very high.

The only way for these guys to avoid this is to create an additional, unrelated handle and address that is not linked to their better-known pseudonym.

It's not that the trusted members are not trustworthy. It's that sources are eager to exploit the community's trust in those members for their own purposes.

A good example of that first sentence is what just happened with a longtime member, ChaseQ

 

[lightspan]

This is fantastic Millard. I'm very much in, with funds and/or assistance at the ready to help make this happen.

 

[Millard]

I just realized small labs are not really at a disadvantage here. As long as they can flood the test environment with shill members, they can change the odds on who gets to send samples for that source's products. The shills get the legit gear, and everyone else gets under dosed gear.

This may be inevitable. Just like the inevitable shills that participate in the steroid underground. But shills are regularly exposed in the forum and I think they can be similarly exposed in a steroid testing program.

Let's assume that 1000 members submit 1000 samples. Also, let's assume 5% are shills with 50 samples either false negatives or false positives. What steps can be taken to identify potential shills?

No doubt that this will be an issue and exactly why the credibility of who sent in samples would greatly influence any of my decisions.

What is an objective way of selecting credible members to submit samples? I'm leery about any method that is done in secrecy and behind closed doors. The method should be automated and unbiased.

 

[1forthegeeks]

I'm in with a monetary donation.

Not comfortable shipping though.




1-4

 

[flenser]

This may be inevitable. Just like the inevitable shills that participate in the steroid underground. But shills are regularly exposed in the forum and I think they can be similarly exposed in a steroid testing program.

Let's assume that 1000 members submit 1000 samples. Also, let's assume 5% are shills with 50 samples either false negatives or false positives. What steps can be taken to identify potential shills?

That's what I think will be a moving target. Considering a shill will need to run lots of members to be effective, he won't be able to spend much time with any one of them. Meso already has a lot of members with amazing shill detection skills. They should detect these more easily as long as selection is in the open. If it's an automation that doesn't report who it selects, or reports them too late, I think shills could be a lot more effective.

 

[newtoketo]

This is fantastic! Now...what are the legal ram's to all of this?

Newtoketo/Jimpaul

 

[newtoketo]

Meso already has a lot of members with amazing shill detection skills.

and some of us that are not so good lol.

 

[whodatnation]

I foresee a point , if we are in any way successful , where what we are experiencing now with the constant barrage of scammers , shills and boards / mods with their hands in the cookie jar will slowly evaporate and the only way they will be able to make any money whatsoever is at the very least be selective scammers. Once this asset is put into play we will effectively change the entire landscape of the current atmosphere. Those with bad intentions will slowly but surely be discovered and the information available to newbs will keep the vast majority from getting ripped off. This is who they feed on and once they lose them the game is changed.

That's what I think will be a moving target. Considering a shill will need to run lots of members to be effective, he won't be able to spend much time with any one of them. Meso already has a lot of members with amazing shill detection skills. They should detect these more easily as long as selection is in the open. If it's an automation that doesn't report who it selects, or reports them too late, I think shills could be a lot more effective.

 

[jhulk]

I know I am new here and have no credibility whatsoever but I have been burnt by a source here and I am willing to help out any way possible. I am deff interested in this.

 

[Ricardo]

Fair play millard! I'm in, would like to see powders included but every single step forward is an amazing improvement.

We may even start seeing lab results showing the same results from different sources, which may or may not show one ugl is running under more than one name, always one step ahead with the scam...

 

[whodatnation]

Welcome to Meso brother and that is the beauty of what we are trying to do, you of no credibility can order and send in samples to be tested. The likelihood of new guys being scammed is the highest because the source has no fear or consequences. Because who is going to believe the fucking noob with one post trying to talk down on so and so

I know I am new here and have no credibility whatsoever but I have been burnt by a source here and I am willing to help out any way possible. I am deff interested in this.

 

[showstoppa]

Im in no matter the price. I think the best way to do it would be have the user send in a sample that is unopened with a video loaded up of him placing it in an envelope and sealing it, along with the address. Similar to how some of the labmax videos are.

As far as donations go, I believe either bitcoin or maybe paypal if we have the ability to negate legal consequences (some do, some don't) or greendot etc.maybe someone can do a bitcoin tutorial with step by step directions and pictures, as many don't know how to use it.

Even if its only 15 of us that donate on a regular basis, thats a lot of samples over time. It doesn't have to be the ones donating sending in the samples. Not saying it cant be but I know I would donate for others to send in samples because it keeps sources honest which helps me.

I have been trying to run down some other leads on testing but for the community as a whole this is by far the best idea yet. Millard just be prepared for the back lash including ddos attcks.

 

[BigHuu]

Only 45 members voted? I thought that in Meso have more than 45 members, or people are more careless about what their puts in the them body?

 

[showstoppa]

Truthfully there will prolly only be 15 maybe 20 people who actually send money even on a board this size if past experience tells us anything.