Putting this up now rather than when I am certain, because by then it will not help anybody.
I have used three payment routes and the only thing that changed with each was how much leverage I had when something went wrong.
One detail people underrate: an irreversible payment removes your only leverage in a dispute, so it should be the last step rather than the first.
If your experience contradicts this, say so in the thread — I would rather be corrected here than have people act on a warning that does not hold.
CryptoCarl said:I have used three payment routes and the only thing that changed with each was how much leverage I had when something went wrong.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
CryptoCarl said:I have used three payment routes and the only thing that changed with each was how much leverage I had when something went wrong.
Pushing back on CryptoCarl here. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemTaking the question as asked, rather than the general version of it. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
PharmacoVig_BOS said:Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.