[dcow]

That’s not the dichotomy. You do get a display. The reviewer’s didn't work and instead of waiting for the replacement unit they just published a “not recommended” and told AirGradient “sorry I don’t get paid enough to give your product a fair shot”.

[ratelimitsteve]

I think the right thing to do in that case is report the failure and the customer service experience you had in dealing with it. I've had companies that I recommend despite an initial failure because the customer service experience in correcting it was excellent, and companies I don't recommend whose product worked relatively well but when the inevitable happened their customer support was sorely lacking.

As a consumer I don't get to buy a unit that the company hand picked and inspected with extra fervor to ensure that it's perfect, I get to buy one off of the shelf. So when I'm reading a review I want to know what the off the shelf experience is. If I read a review that gave the company "a fair shot" by ignoring the broken unit and reviewing the replacement I'd feel lied to.

[dcow]

They didn't just include the “I had to get a replacement unit” as a part of a bigger review where they ultimately did what normal consumers do and have the manufacturer replace the unit. Kudos to AirGradient for not trying to pamper their reviewer with a hand-vetted unit like everyone else. But it backfired. The reviewer isn’t a normal consumer who cares enough to return their unit for a working one. That’s the point. You’re not getting an authentic experience because the reviewer just gave up because there wasn’t time/budget to do the fair review.

[dns_snek]

Or perhaps more accurately, "sorry you didn't pay us enough to give your product a fair shot".