Sorry, sieht so aus, als hätten wir nicht genug von diesem Produkt.
The Alexotos vendor list has been a go-to reference for many in the mechanical keyboard community. It’s often described as a curated, frequently updated list of trusted vendors. But over time, more people have started to question how reliable it actually is and whether it should be taken at face value.
One of the most immediate concerns people raise is how well the list is actually maintained. Examples that come up include:
• Vendors staying listed despite ongoing issues
• Outdated or incorrect information
• Misspelled names or inconsistent entries
• Vendors reportedly remaining on the list even when customers are still waiting on group buys said to be overdue by multiple years (still being discussed as of 04.05.2026)
Individually, these might not seem like major problems. But taken together, they raise questions about how closely the list is reviewed and updated.
Beyond maintenance, there’s also uncertainty around how vendors are selected in the first place. There doesn’t appear to be a clearly defined set of criteria, which leads to speculation about what drives inclusion.
Some community members point out that well-established vendors, particularly in the EU, have been missing from the list for long periods despite having solid reputations. At the same time, others with more questionable track records have remained.
There’s also a common perception that decisions are influenced heavily by feedback from a Discord server rather than direct, personal experience. The concern here is that much of this feedback may not come from firsthand interaction, but instead from repeated posts that gradually build momentum. Over time, that can create a snowball effect where early opinions shape wider perception without much independent verification.
Another early concern people bring up is how criticism is handled within the surrounding community spaces. There’s a recurring perception that questioning vendor choices or pushing back on the list can lead to negative reactions, and in some cases, users claim they’ve been removed or banned after speaking out.
Whether every instance is accurate or not, that perception alone has had an impact. It can make people less willing to share honest feedback and raises broader questions about how open the environment is to differing opinions.
Concerns aren’t limited to users. Vendors themselves have also shared mixed experiences when it comes to working with Alexotos.
Some vendors who have collaborated or sponsored in the past were, at times, not clearly marked as such on the list. From the outside, that creates confusion about which listings are based on independent evaluation versus prior relationships, and suggests that these connections may not always be consistently tracked or disclosed.
There are also reports from vendors describing frustrating collaborations. In some cases, they say that important notes or product details were provided ahead of time but didn’t make it into coverage. Others question whether the fees charged for exposure match the level of care and attention given.
From my own perspective as an owner, I’ve had direct experience working with Alexotos through affiliated companies. In those cases, the level of reliability and follow-through did not meet expectations, especially considering the cost associated with the collaboration. Combined with the inconsistencies in how sponsorships appear to be labeled, it adds to the perception that attention to detail and accountability can fall short.
Because of these concerns, many people no longer rely on a single source. Instead, they cross-check information across multiple platforms.
Sites like kbd.news and KeebFinder are often mentioned as alternatives. They’re generally seen as more neutral in how they present vendors. Any commercial element tends to be straightforward, usually limited to affiliate codes where a vendor may be highlighted if a code exists, rather than being framed as a curated endorsement of trust or quality.
For many users, that clearer separation makes it easier to interpret the information without second-guessing the intent behind it.
All of this points to a broader takeaway. Most people don’t treat the list as a final authority anymore. At best, it’s a starting point for discovering vendors.
If you’re considering buying from a shop you’re not familiar with, it’s worth taking a few extra steps:
• Look at recent customer experiences, not just older reputation
• Check multiple community sources to see if feedback is consistent
• Do some independent research before committing
That extra effort can make a real difference, especially in a space where information can vary depending on where you look.
The Alexotos vendor list still holds influence, but confidence in it doesn’t seem as strong as it once was. Most of the concerns come down to a few key areas: transparency, consistency, and how decisions are made.
Like any curated resource, its value depends on the process behind it. And right now, that process is what more people are starting to question.
A little message from David. as CandyKeys.
Alexotos, you probably are reading this as the traffic from USA and Canada has spiked through the roof. I do not care to be on your list but I am speaking on behalf of the vendors that have been left out. You have had quiet the influence over the past years, and you should probably realise you may need to put a bit more effort and due diligence into your vendor list than you do. You lead the community on vendor suggestions, its a nice position to be in, but stating "and curated from firsthand experience." is just a false statement given the vendors you have on the list. I challenge you to better yourself, and in return I will better myself too.
