> Yeah okay, why not.

Thanks.

> if I understand correctly the phrase in question is "when not only hasn't it been
> reviewed, but it hasn't been sold".

That's part of it, yes.

> This is a perfectly solid statement, [...] it does not contain a logical contradiction.

Of course it does not. Nobody suggested it would. The question is whether the following two statements:

(1) "It is a substantial mistake to inform MZ readers that the "CherryPad 2" has been reviewed, when not only hasn't it been reviewed, but it hasn't been sold" (#161)
(2) "Yes, it could be a review of hardware not publicly available." (#171)

do contradict *each other*. In my understanding of phrase 1 it paints "not having been sold" as one reason that the article about the device is not a review, logically rendering the device "having been sold" a prerequisite for an article on it to be a review. Now, phrase 2 says that an article on a device that is "not publicly available" and thus hasn't been sold (yet) can very well be a review. That's where I see the logical contradiction. Do you?

> If a native English speaker were to break it down, it would sound like "it hasn't
> been reviewed yet, it hasn't even been sold yet". A phrase like this is used as a
> way of hammering home your point by piling up the facts with whomever you're
> debating with. The second statement is intended to be more dramatic than the first

That's well understood, even by me. But that was not the question. My question is what semantic function "when" has in "when not only hasn't it been reviewed, but it hasn't been sold" regarding the preceding "It is a substantial mistake to inform MZ readers that the "CherryPad 2" has been reviewed". In my understanding "when" can only have the same meaning like "because", "as" or "since" in this context. What's your opinion on this?

> Does this make sense to you?

Unfortunately not, as my question was about something entirely different.

> If not, feel free to ask any questions you have.

Done above.