Yeah . . . I've been on the fence about this one ever since Josh first posted it. Might as well make it a Pine fence.
On one hand, it's a sponsored project -- advertisement for a specific product sold by someone not-FT, and we do have a section for that. HK at least is on good terms with FT, but what if Banggood or Gearbest were to sponsor threads like these? In a sense, they already are, but those projects require far less effort from the reviewer -- Josh is actually building out the kit, instead of unpacking and "unbiased" reviewing it.
Which is the other hand -- this project needs a LOT of work, and he's carefully build-logging his work. In this respect I've been letting it slide (and not bringing it up until someone complained
)
I guess my stance so far has been that Josh has been VERY forward that he didn't buy the kit, and thorough about the parts, quality, methods and costs, so this isn't an advertisement masquerading as a "review". That's content we're generally welcoming of here, regardless of the vendor.
. . . but moving forward . . .
Keeping in mind that Josh is a buddy of ours, and making an exception for him or gerrymandering the rules so he slips to the right side of the line is generally a bad idea -- that tends to bite you in the end -- What is our policy moving forward?
Simple "unbiased review" declared or not, sponsored or affiliate linked, clearly goes in the "sponsored review" section. If they want to Pay FT for a review, they can, but cheaping out by bribing a handful of forum members is something we don't want to encourage. I don't have an issue with a full complicated build-log that happens to be sponsored living among the regular threads so long as it's declared . . .
. . . But how complicated is complicated enough?
These are opposite sides of this spectrum, and I'm not sure where we should draw the line. What if Banggood were to try the same with a kit they sell? Drawing it based on company sounds like a bad policy to me (although some companies may get less grace than others). Drawing based on material/type (balsa kits are OK, but not electronics) seems bad for similar reasons -- I could see a few build-logs for FPV gear or multirotors that would be equally indepth and interesting.
Dunno . . . I've always preferred to have the line pre-drawn than entirely seat-of-the-pants, but not sure myself how much effort (or other criteria) is enough.
Thoughts?