You can see the archived poll results on the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20221220093741/https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/72851
Why are you asking? Is adding 3 mm to the length of the charger a big deal?
On the first glance it seems well worth the added convenience for those who actually have a little longer protected cells.
Supporting all unprotected and most protected 21700s, and not super long ones, is fine by me. Seriously.
If the super rare 79mm "21800" cells require a re-engineering of the UT4 base model (mold, PCB, etc), then i am all against it because of the raise of cost for the manufacturer who will then pass on the extra costs down to the end consumer which is us.
All we need is a super compact BLF charger which fits most of our needs at a nice price. Changing the UT4 base will only add to the manufacturing cost!
Just proving that there is in fact, a lot of demand for it.
I seem to be the first who voted for support of super-long batteries. OTOH, I don't see any reason why this would cause significant extra costs. OTOH, I actually do have batteries that require such a long charging bay (e.g. protected LG M50T from the Rofis MR30 flashlight).
i am confident that in the end the poll result will be that overlong batteries support should be a given.
but it is clear why the manufacturer is asking the question. the UT4 charger is already done, ready for relabeling to "UC4 BLF". it is the charger we always dreamed of.
now you guys want the extralong bays. of course, this goes against the original product release.
Okay, makes sense. But as far as I know the BLF charger was meant to be made of aluminum whereas the UT4 is made of plastic.
I'm not sure if DLYFull will be using the same tools again. Will they?
Absolutely necessary. 76mm at least, preferably 78mm.
If the bays are under 76mm, then there should at least be banana plug connections for an external cell holder.
Yes, of course it’s necessary.
Is this not the charger that does everything?
How long are the protected Sofirn 21700 batteries?
I know every time I shoehorn them into my Zanflare C4 I’m afraid I’m bending something.
Not too sure how it happened, but I’m embarrassed to say I voted the wrong way 
Must be getting older than I realized.
Anyway when the votes are finalized, if it’s possible please add one to supporting the longer option and subtract one away from the other.
You can cancel your vote and yust vote the other way :)
Is this because they have a die already for plastic ? Is this - “we are going with aluminium.” no longer the “case”? It would suck to have a buy another charger for the protected cells.
I like the idea of banana plug connections whatever the bay size ends up being 
I really want an aluminium charger, which is why I’m making this poll.
All of the people I’ve spoken to have said this is a good idea, so I want to make this reality.
This seems an interesting workaround/solution (for people who want it, can purchase option). How difficult would it be to have such kind of connection (eg. in the future, longer batteries become available, we just need a longer external cell holder)?
I've not been into flashlights long, but it seems like I'm seeing increased interest in lights with larger cells than the old standby 18650. I haven't invested in any 21xxx lights (yet) but that will likely change no matter how much I resist "cell creep".
I voted for 78mm. compatibility (and/or banana plugs) just for future-proofing.
slmjim
Usually, battery-charging devices are designed so that the only electrically-conductive exposed parts are the contact pads for the ends of the batteries. Making the entire thing out of a conductive material adds additional risks. Anodizing the aluminum would probably help a lot, but it’ll still be important to take care about things like scratches in the anodizing or damage to the battery wrappers.
On the plus side, an aluminum charger should handle heat better. On the minus side though, it increases the chance of shorts, so extra care should be taken during use and with the overall design.