Review-Based Vendor Ranking System Proposal

S

str8bizns

Explorer
Joined
Dec 28, 2025
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Location
Miami, florida
Could the moderators look into setting up a ranking system for source sites and vendors? One idea would be to check out EROIDS (gear source reviews) and adopt a similar approach. That would remove much of the uncertainty when picking a supplier. It would cover lab testing results, how quickly orders are processed, shipping-related questions, compound quality, weight, and so on.
 
Absolutely, positively, not.

This forum is built on the principle that each person should figure out for themselves which vendors are worth considering, weighing their own situation and how much risk they are comfortable with.

A ranking system would do a disservice by making it easy for people to be lazy and buy from a vendor blindly, without doing any real research or vetting on their own. More importantly, though, any such system is susceptible to manipulation and that makes the entire thing completely untrustworthy.

Lists that "rank" or "rate" vendors are already everywhere online (plenty of them are even sold), and most are either shaped by whatever biases the author holds or flat out purchased by 1 or more vendors.

Before long we will be updating and improving the reviews sections so people have more information to weigh when deciding which vendors to consider, but at the end of the day our aim with vendors is to provide information, not recommendations (with obvious exceptions for bad/scam vendors, low quality/unsafe products, etc.).
 
It would be nice if the vendor list indicated things like whether they operate US warehouses, what payment methods they accept, and any other details people find relevant.

Plus, which ones carry AAS and hgh. You know, the essentials.
 
If that's what you're after, scammers looking to profit by tampering with test results can always be found at Finnrisk and Peptide Critic.
 
Mr. Blonde said:

Haven't come across those before. I'll take a look.
Click to expand...

At Finnrisk, the people who are scammers manipulating test results for profit will test your vial at no cost so it can be added to their site ratings. If you have a vial tested through Janoshik, certain vendors will provide a credit.
 
Finnrisk is a pay-for-play operation that skews test results for money, relies on a mix of questionable labs, and has a broken rating setup. One clear example: it heavily favors sellers offering single vials.

That's the problem with nearly every rating system: it may prioritize things that mean nothing to you, while ignoring what you truly require.
 
Mr. Blonde said:

It would be nice if the vendor list indicated things like whether they operate US warehouses, what payment methods they accept, and any other details people find relevant.

Plus, which ones carry AAS and hgh. You know, the essentials.
Click to expand...

It's always puzzled me that a seller can openly list those 2 items in a spot anyone can browse — a forum, a Discord server, anywhere publicly readable — and yet raids don't happen right away. That strikes me as a huge risk, but it's something I run into constantly.
 
zippy has my full agreement.

Beyond that, you'll run into tactics such as "random reporting", or reports aimed at specific batches, used against these sites to push outcomes toward one side.

For instance.. sending the same batch in 100x so it creeps toward 99%>>...

What I'd strongly suggest is simply reading through the forums and making every vendor answer for what they do. Whether good or bad, then reach your own informed conclusion.

For well-liked peptides, batches turn over fairly frequently, so how you review/test them should match the risk level you're comfortable with.

You've got this!
 
Peptidesearch said:

Mr. Blonde said:

Haven't come across those before. I'll take a look.
Click to expand...

At Finnrisk, the people who are scammers manipulating test results for profit will test your vial at no cost so it can be added to their site ratings. If you have a vial tested through Janoshik, certain vendors will provide a credit.
Click to expand...
This belongs to the fraudulent scheme. Nothing is truly free. Individuals with greater expertise than mine have concluded that companies are paying Finnrocks large sums for favorable "ratings," and a portion of that money funds the "complimentary" testing—on the condition that a few subpar results get mixed in, so the rigged ratings seem honest and unbiased.
 
Mr. Blonde said:

It would be nice if the vendor list indicated things like whether they operate US warehouses, what payment methods they accept, and any other details people find relevant.

Plus, which ones carry AAS and hgh. You know, the essentials.
Click to expand...
The developers have the warehouse location feature queued up, so it should show up at some point.

When it comes to AAS and similar items, there are already many other boards focused on those products.
 
ZippityDooDah said:

Peptidesearch said:

Mr. Blonde said:

Haven't come across those before. I'll take a look.
Click to expand...

At Finnrisk, the people who are scammers manipulating test results for profit will test your vial at no cost so it can be added to their site ratings. If you have a vial tested through Janoshik, certain vendors will provide a credit.
Click to expand...
This belongs to the fraudulent scheme. Nothing is truly free. Individuals with greater expertise than mine have concluded that companies are paying Finnrocks large sums for favorable "ratings," and a portion of that money funds the "complimentary" testing—on the condition that a few subpar results get mixed in, so the rigged ratings seem honest and unbiased.
Click to expand...
Based on what I've seen up to now, their motives look sound. Their newsletter makes it clear they're encouraging people to reach out to their vendor and get them to register with the platform.

Beyond that, I attempt to cross-reference what I find with independent testing patterns discussed on forums, since people have pointed out that vials from the same kit can differ substantially in mass because of a fill nozzle problem or a blended batch. When you weigh cost against the chance of results being tampered with, group testing comes out looking like the most practical route.
 
Habibibi said:

Finnrisk is a pay-for-play operation that skews test results for money, relies on a mix of questionable labs, and has a broken rating setup. One clear example: it heavily favors sellers offering single vials.

That's the problem with nearly every rating system: it may prioritize things that mean nothing to you, while ignoring what you truly require.
Click to expand...
Vials that contain more than the label states receive the same poor rating as those that contain less, in their system. Personally, I don't mind an overfilled vial, provided the precise amount on the label is known.
 
Peptidesearch said:

ZippityDooDah said:

Peptidesearch said:

Mr. Blonde said:

Haven't come across those before. I'll take a look.
Click to expand...

At Finnrisk, the people who are scammers manipulating test results for profit will test your vial at no cost so it can be added to their site ratings. If you have a vial tested through Janoshik, certain vendors will provide a credit.
Click to expand...
This belongs to the fraudulent scheme. Nothing is truly free. Individuals with greater expertise than mine have concluded that companies are paying Finnrocks large sums for favorable "ratings," and a portion of that money funds the "complimentary" testing—on the condition that a few subpar results get mixed in, so the rigged ratings seem honest and unbiased.
Click to expand...
Based on what I've seen up to now, their motives look sound. Their newsletter makes it clear they're encouraging people to reach out to their vendor and get them to register with the platform.

Beyond that, I attempt to cross-reference what I find with independent testing patterns discussed on forums, since people have pointed out that vials from the same kit can differ substantially in mass because of a fill nozzle problem or a blended batch. When you weigh cost against the chance of results being tampered with, group testing comes out looking like the most practical route.
Click to expand...
What really counts is how positive their intentions look on the site. Whether they are actually deceptive and lack good intentions matters far less.
 
A ranking system would turn into a mess. Vendors would begin offering rewards in exchange for positive feedback, and they would all set up fake accounts to boost their own position and tear down rivals.
 
ZippityDooDah said:

Absolutely, positively, not.

This forum is built on the principle that each person should figure out for themselves which vendors are worth considering, weighing their own situation and how much risk they are comfortable with.

A ranking system would do a disservice by making it easy for people to be lazy and buy from a vendor blindly, without doing any real research or vetting on their own. More importantly, though, any such system is susceptible to manipulation and that makes the entire thing completely untrustworthy.

Lists that "rank" or "rate" vendors are already everywhere online (plenty of them are even sold), and most are either shaped by whatever biases the author holds or flat out purchased by 1 or more vendors.

Before long we will be updating and improving the reviews sections so people have more information to weigh when deciding which vendors to consider, but at the end of the day our aim with vendors is to provide information, not recommendations (with obvious exceptions for bad/scam vendors, low quality/unsafe products, etc.).
Click to expand...
Have you checked out how droids handles reviews? Their setup is basically impossible to game. To get a review posted, the person has to list how much they bought, their order ID, talk about delivery speed, how they paid, what their experience with support was like, whether the product was good to go, and attach a photo of what arrived. Sure, someone could try to mess with it, but since so many different buyers use different vendors, a vendor can't just wipe out bad feedback. If there's a complaint, a vendor rep gets to respond. Getting 20-30 reviews a day for every vendor isn't something that can be faked, as long as you, the moderator, don't let it happen. I've personally dealt with two vendors on eroids: N_psgear and O_gear. O_gear sits at the top. N_ps is ranked somewhere in the mid 80’s. Still, I've been using naps for 12+ years and never had a single problem. If someone drops a negative review for N_ps, I'll jump in and break down what's really going on and why. Sometimes it's just a troll making up a complaint, and N_ps will step in and expose it. When it's legit, N_ps will work with the buyer and fix it. Everything happens publicly so anyone can watch and make their own call. Your only job is to make sure the reviewer fills in all the required details. If they don't, it doesn't go up. Every reviewer also has to verify their account.
 
Sasquatch said:

A great deal can be accomplished in this space simply by making use of the Search Button. 🧞‍♂️
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think the issue is that I'm not tech-savvy enough for that approach. What I did instead was choose a single category and read through it starting from the oldest posts. It might take much longer, but it's also far more focused.

As for a rating system, putting together a centralized database for a niche/hobby like this (what would you even call it?) doesn't seem like a good idea. On top of that, suppliers appear to cycle in and out constantly, so a setup like that could end up giving people confidence in one that has recently lost its good standing. +What Zippity said.

On a side note. The complete username feels too rigid and formal. "Zippity" comes across as casual. And "ZDD" sounds… unlucky
 
What I'd most want to have is a way to filter results according to how long someone has been a member or a marketplace here on this forum. It's not a guarantee, but I'm curious about all those vendors that suddenly appeared around September of last year. For my part, I have more trust in vendors who've been established for a while. That's also how I feel about vendors located in the USA, and those who accept payment methods besides crypto.

I suppose I simply don't have faith in individuals who have nothing to lose. Or at least, much less to lose.
 
Back
Top