Is a review marketing? You bet, each and every one of them. That's how we get samples.. companies write this of as a marketing expense. But I'm not about to post stuff in a review if I don't think it's relevant (and to me overclocking is NEVER relevant), but sometimes people mistake my comments in a review conclusion as something they are not. Yes, I wrote these sticks have considerable overclocking headroom (and they do), and no, I do not have screenshots in the review, but rather than making that comment to point out the ability of these sticks, that comment was made in reference to the ICs used to build this kit.
1 - OK, it's a marketing expense. I don't dispute that. However there is a difference between reviews (which are marketing), and advertisements (which are also marketing). That fact should absolutely not affect the substance of any review. In fact, this is widely agreed upon - this is why Steam reviews clearly demarcate which reviews were left by players who recieved the game for free - Because that fact often leads to bias and it's in the interests of the consumer and a fair marketplace, to ensure that everyone is at least aware of it, even if bias cannot be eliminated entirely.
A company should not be able to send substandard product out into the wild as a marketing expense and expect to get a positive return on that expense simply because reviewers wish to continue receiving samples. Reviewers should have the backbone to serve the consumer with a warts-and-all appraisal of a product. Conversely, if a company is prepared to put their product where their mouth is by making good product, that's exactly the kind of thing that should be rewarded - something that relentlessly positive coverage of all products turns into a practical impossibility, by turning every review into the same meaningless shout of recommendation that nobody can or should take seriously.
Sadly, you have referenced again and again things like continued sampling. It really seems to be your primary concern that your relationship with these companies remains sunshine and roses - and I understand that, but I despise it.
2 - If overclocking is never relevant, don't mention it. Especially not in a review of a product where of all the existing marketing material, only one sentence of it explicitly mentions overclocking and not "overclocked" (as in factory overclocks).
3 - I am not at all asking for screenshots and it's your own particular variant of "character assassination" to misrepresent my argument that way. If you don't want to cover overclocking, then that's fine. But don't try to have your cake and eat it too - If you're going to make claims about a stick's overclocking ability you are expected to either verify them, explain them, or both. In this review you explained nothing, demonstrated nothing, and claimed everything. All the relevant information that could have at least made your overclocking claims understandable without actual testing, you ultimately provided over the course of this thread, defending yourself, and not in the review, where it would have actually served and educated the consumer.
Not least, I pointed out a reason why Corsair codifies the IC information on their sticks the way they do and that has been ignored - despite the fact that it has actually become a marketing feature to guarantee Samsung memory ICs, due to the fact so many memory brands will gladly swap out Samsung B-Die for an inferior IC with less headroom, as long as they can still maintain the advertised XMP profile. For purposes of stock clocked operation that is, naturally, irrelevant, but for the purposes of overclocking, it is almost the entire relevant point.
I have no doubt you're aware of the latter point here of course, which is why your review studiously avoids even using the word "Samsung" at any point, despite the fact you have so HEAVILY relied on explaining Samsung B-Die in this thread.
Once again - If this information you're so proud of being able to explain were in the fucking review, there'd really be no issue here. It is conspicuous by it's absence and I do not believe this is an accident. You are likely well aware that Corsair enjoy having that freedom to switch to a cheaper IC if one becomes available for this product, and do not wish to risk your future interactions with them by throwing them under the bus. To me, that's simply a betrayal of the consumer.
Of course, you are absolutely welcome to claim that this last point is wrong and that you merely forgot to illuminate the consumer about the wondrous benefits of Samsung B-Die - but I would ask that if indeed you do want to claim I've made that assumption in error, you do the decent thing and add "Samsung B-Die" to some salient place in the review text, so that other poor souls don't make the same assumption.
Back and forth, never stopping. 
It's purely done to tempt people like you, because I enjoy the discussions.
also, not all 4GHz kits with RGB LED comes cheap unless there's another brand you have in mind that compete with Corsair's offering on an even playing field...
But nicely said.
