I think that issues of tailcap failures and other problems are an indication of manufacturing and quality control issues and DO need addressing?
Agreed, and never said otherwise, and I guess no one would. BUT ... the known tailcap problem aside ... I do not remember that many other problems that show up on a regular basis ... I mostly see tint, donut and tailcap as well as dust.
In this regard Surefire IMHO has not addressed the problems being experienced and cannot expect the QC issues which are obviously a part of this problem to be ignored simply because a hard core of afficiandos don't like their favourite manufacturer to be criticised.
This is unfair and the components of your argument aren't even related, because SF doesn't expect anything in these halls, and those who you call "hardcore afficionados" in a very negative way have every right to post their opinion as you or the others who put blame on SF do. Those "hardcore afficionados" aren't SureFire ... but fellow flashaholics.
Did you ever notice that SF does not address any problem on CPF any more? Ever wondered why?
I fear that those who are satisfied with their U2's on this forum are being unrealistic and unsympathetic to expect those who do experience problems to not voice their anger and dissappointment at what is after all an expensive pu rchase.
Where did you get the impression that anyone wants to "silence the opposition" as you are suggesting? You are using demagogic and polarising arguments which simply aren't true. Of course everyone expressing critisism should be prepared to encounter those who are satisfied expressing support. And I like it that way ... it represents the free flow of information and forming of opinions.
Would you want the voices in favour of SF being silenced?
It is because the Gladius underwent exhaustive testing prior to release!
Suggesting that the U2 wasn't tested prior to release is beyond any reasonable statement or opinion I can come up with. Sorry.
The HDS uses complicated electronics but isn't known for a high incidence of failure? Again you must ask why?
Because it was tested and had its armageddon under the name of Arc. If this should be of relevance to this thread, which I highly doubt.
In the end ... I am sorry to see you using a very polarising style of argumentation, trying to divide and seperate us flashaholics into two fighting groups where no such thing should be ... hiding behind a mask of basic truths like the necessity to bring up problems and issues with lights ... and suggesting false assumptions, like SF trying to influence anything on CPF or some members wanting to suppress the "truth".
I would prefer a more reasonable and open discussion with "the art" and our hobby as the center of interest instead of fueling some fires.
bernie