Well how about weighing in instead of telling us how qualified in the area you are and saying very little?
The biggest issue IMO with a site like this proclaiming independence and objectivity is the provision of products supplied as review samples with no expectation of the return of said items. It has been brought up by me (and others) years ago with the suggestion of a live register of 'free/gifted' products so people reading those 'unbiased' reviews can familiarize themselves with any gifts/samples that preceded those reviews.
Anything else is not transparent, and neither does a vague 'it was provided by the company' quote. That does not describe whether the item is on temporary loan, optional return, should be destroyed after review, is essentially a gift, or other possibilities.
What Amir does with the stuff is anyone's guess. He has been opaque in the past and continues to be so. Some brands clearly would like to curry favour one way or another, but I am reasonably confident things are above board. Clarification however is needed.
Our school teachers are unable to accept any gifts valued at over $50 without declaring the gift and surrendering it to the school, lest their gift be perceived as somehow advantaging their child in some way.
Our local councillors (all of them) have ongoing declarations (where the total is >$500) available for anyone to read.
View attachment 229388
There are numerous items reviewed here with considerable market values. What happens to those products? Are they sold to run the web hosting? Do the moderators get their pick in lieu of a salary? Are there 100 Topping boxes stashed in an offsite storage facility, or are they simply donated to the Good Will? Nobody knows.
Transparency is a highly desirable characteristic in HiFi. I'd like to see more transparency in relation to this subject.