I wasn't expecting long term testing. I was expecting more information than just a rehash of the manufacturer specifications. As I mentioned, setting up all the tents on the lawn and turning the hose (with a pressure nozzle) on them would have elicited some quick results relating to waterproofness and condensation. So would turning loose the dog or kids for a little "strength testing" if a windstorm wasn't available. That's what I've done to test the tents I've bought, which I've done before deciding whether or not to keep the tent. Someone also mentioned diagrams of the actual space inside the tents. For many cottage manufacturers, that info is available on their websites, but for some tents it isn't, and it's important information for those trying to make "buy" decisions.
The SOTM report on single-wall tents that has been referenced several times in this thread is a shining example of what we have been conditioned to expect from BPL SOTM reports. I think we all assumed that this one would be similar.
If a manufacturer isn't able to supply test models, I believe that should be noted. Not as a backhand to the manufacturer, but to provide a complete listing of the tents that meet the specific criteria, as a service to potential buyers.
Chris, I understand that there were problems, especially with the delay in publication. You're not the only one; "Balls" and "Sunshine" were within a few days of completing the Appalachian trail by the time their first AT article, written several months earlier, was published, which removed any "suspense" over whether or not they'd make it. I believe, though, that a perusal of old SOTM reports would be very useful in demonstrating why we were disappointed. .
Chris, I just read your above post that evidently was being written at the same time as this one. It actually would have been extremely helpful--and not at all subjective!--if you had described the results of the trips, including the weather conditions. That might be good information for a short follow-up article.