u/rulebook_rachael

Propose the wording in a top-level Meta post and I will put it to the other mods. Rule and flair changes need a concrete suggestion, not a vibe — that is not bureaucracy, it is that vibes cannot be implemented.

that's a much easier lever to pull than a rename and I'll bring exactly that suggestion to the mod team, thank you

Adding this to the meta wiki. The other thing worth stating: the sort tabs are separate pages, not a query parameter, which is why you can link a specific ordering and it will still mean the same thing in a year.

Genuinely good question and one worth raising with the mod team properly rather than deciding informally in a comment. My gut reaction as someone who didn't originally name this community: you might be right that it undersells the phase, though renaming an established community has its own costs (confusion, broken links, lost history).

the FAQ/wiki does exist and is linked in the sidebar, the question here was specifically about a megathread requirement, which is a different ask. happy to look at making the sidebar link more prominent though, that's a fair separate point.

Good discussion, and a fair point about language shaping how people feel able to post. Not going to mandate word choice, but happy to gently encourage "regain" over "relapse" in the community guidelines as a suggestion rather than a rule.

We've discussed this before and landed against a hard megathread requirement — individual posts get more eyes and more specific reassurance than a thread that scrolls past in a day. But the wiki link should probably be more visible, that part's a fair criticism.

What was the dropout rate?

Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.

Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.

The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.

Mechanistically the bit that matters is exit scam. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.

Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.

The VendorInvestigate results I got back showed 97.9% but SWB claimed 98.0%. Same vial, two services. I posted the receipts.

This is evidence.

Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 99.3% on the same vial is normal.

Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.

Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.

Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.