^
A good example I think is Sofirn. I’m not against Sofirn, but it was very noticeable the last couple of days that there are a lot of (objective) reviews of Sofirn lights. Obviously, this will increase brand exposure thus sales; hence this can be seen as a form of advertising. And this seems to be a legit construction to advertise outside the commercial section. I think this is what jon_slider is referring to. This is just an observation from my side.
yes
It is the Vendor, not the “reviewer”, that is causing multiple posts (SPAM) about the same light. I think “reviewers” of free lights should post to the SAME thread, IF there is already a “review”.
That way we won’t have to see all the same MFG info and photos, over and over, and the “reviewers” can focus on posting their own ORIGINAL material based on their own tests. I DO value Original material from “reviewers” of free samples.
I have always wondered how do people get all these lights for free, are there lists to sign up to, do they ask directly or get asked?
I have offered a couple of times and never heard back, I think they fear what I would do to their product :laughing:
ask the vendor 
Vendor will ask you for a link to one of your reviews, so they can judge the quality of your work for their advertising purposes.
One of the easiest ways to create a “review” to promote yourself to a Vendor, is to use a YouTube Video. Some “reviewers” just post a link to their Video, which forces you to watch the whole thing to find any original material. Often Video “reviews” have even less original material than written “reviews”.
Vendors like video “reviews”, I do not.
Yeah, watched a lot, mostly clueless people turning the light on and off and yappin although some do a really good job even stripping the light down etc but they’re rare.
I never watch video reviews. I’d far rather have a well-written article with photos and runtime graphs that I can read through at my own pace. I really don’t understand why vendors are so fixated on videos.
Wellp, as one who just posted a long-overdue review of a free(ish) Sofirn light, I can both understand where youse are coming from, but something you don’t see is the behind-the-scenes PMing that goes on. Lots of it is advice or suggestions at what BLFers would like, and in the other direction hints as to what’s coming down the ’pike.
Most of the lights I repeatedly recommend (RJ02, DV-S9) like a broken record, I paid full price for. Others, same, but for use as hosts (’502B, F13). Freebies, I give honest reviews, including shortcomings and things that just bug me. But how else to improve next iterations of a light, without directed feedback?
One light, I pointed out how I thought (and still think) it was hands-down the best thought-out light I’ve ever come across, yet the horrible green-tinted beam was hideous. No idea if I’ll ever get a for-review freebie from that brand, but I told it like it was. 
Me personally, I like reading reviews. Doesn’t matter to me if it was paid for or supplied for free, as long as the review’s honest. Most of the reviews I’ve seen here, of freebies, have been just that.
So? I don’t mind. Especially if I can answer “yes” to the question “Would I want to know this before I’d buy that light?”.
Yeah, that grates. Hate c&p jobs from the mfr site. pix and text.
My first was after seriously grexing about a horrible green beam, I got asked if I’d want to try a different CT and see if it’s any better.
Another, a mfr posted a thread here looking for volunteers to review lights. I said “Sure!”. And kinda like giving a loaded gun to a drunk monkey, they sent me a light to review.
A vendor contacted me to do a couple reviews after I wrote a popular rant on reddit about how you probably want an 18650-powered light even though you think you don’t. Another vendor followed suit, and at that point I had written enough reviews to have credibility when asking for lights to review.
I still get ignored though. Nitecore and Acebeam have never replied to me even when they were actively asking for reviewers. Thrunite replied, but never sent me the Neutron I asked for nor said they weren’t going to.
Of course, free review samples do get publicity for the manufacturer, but I don’t see anything wrong with that because good reviews are also useful to the community. So often, I see questions (mostly on reddit, where I’m more active) about lights that require an independent test by someone with a modicum of expertise to answer. Yes, too many reviews on one light can get a bit stale, but I have yet to see clutter on a level that makes finding things I’m interested in on the forum harder.
Of course, I’m not a neutral observer here. I like writing reviews, and I mostly like the free stuff (I’m still not sure what I’m going to do with that Wuben T102, which has about the worst firmware possible).
zanflare has a shill feeling bike light thread in non commercial.
looks like there in cahoots with huntking to me.
You reviewing some of the lights that come through this place would be like having Mozart review a Miley Cyrus album.
“It needs more cowbell…”
Add ‘genstattu’ to the list.
3 different people in recent weeks here only to post references to this brand.
dentrangtrihanoi.vn = spammer
I agree. It certainly looks like huntking is directly connected to zanflare… All posts except one are connected to them. THUMBSDOWN
Give it to me! :innocent:
Yep, looks like huntking is a zanflare shill account.
Cosmo is just ledflashlighting.com, which is #1 on the Hall of Shame list.