đź§ľ Vendor Reviews

:receipt: Vendor Reviews

Purpose: A dedicated space for community members to share experience-based reviews of vendors—focused on factual representation rather than promotion, linking to products, or transactional facilitation.


:white_check_mark: What is Encouraged

  • Factual user reports: delivery times, sample quality, chemistry details like purity tests, neutral reputational commentary.

    • Example: “Ordered from Vendor X: arrived in 10 days; reagent tests showed 98% purity.”
  • Reversible, signed off experiences: ensure all statements are first-person and experience-based.

  • Vendor names may be mentioned, as user-generated content is protected under Section 230—so long as you remain a neutral intermediary, not the publisher of affiliate content. (SourceForge, Congress.gov)


:prohibited: What Must Not Be Allowed

  • No promotional language or sales facilitation: avoid direct purchase links, affiliate or coupon codes, or instructions for buying.

  • No organizing group buys or coordinating purchases.

  • Editorial scam ratings or “definitive” list-making without attributing claims to user reports and offering vendor response or appeal. Platform declarations of vendor wrongdoing may invalidate § 230 protections and raise defamation risk. (Congress.gov, everythingpolicy.org)


:compass: Guidelines Overview

Allowed Prohibited
First-person vendor review with neutral tone Embedded links to purchase pages
Shipping, packaging, purity experience Payment info, methods, or organizing purchases
Attributed quotes from other users Declarations stating “Vendor X is a scam”—unless clearly user-claimed, with appeal options

:hammer_and_wrench: Moderation Policies & Protections

  • User-generated links: permitted when describing personal experience; offensiveness or promotional spam may be moderated.

  • “Scam vendor” posts: allowed if based strictly on user reports, attributed accurately, and disclaimers are present. Encourage vendor appeals or follow-up statements.

  • Moderation is in good faith: enforce rules based on clear guidelines, consistently documented. Doing so supports safe harbor under both § 230(c)(1) and § 230(c)(2) for good-faith takedowns. (Dynamis LLP, FasterCapital, innovation.consumerreports.org, JD Supra, Congress.gov)


:bullseye: Best Practices for Reviewers

  1. Speak from personal experience: avoid posting hearsay or unverified speculation.

  2. Include purity data or reagent results where available.

  3. Disclaim any medical, legal, or chemical advice.

  4. Do not embed purchase links or encourage contact.

  5. Respect intellectual property—don’t post copyrighted materials without permission. (The Insurance Universe)