The question I have now is if YOU took the time to read it and if so,
Yes I sure did read your FAQ once you pointed it out.
I don't follow your main thread here although I knew it existed in the back of my mind, I could have gone and found it, if I'd been motivated to do so, but yeah, a lot of people I'm sure just search [meter model number here], find your video on youtube and...
do you understand why this has nothing to do with safety?
Well. I think it's clear your testing is not presently intended to provide commentary on the safety of meters or how they meet or not the CAT (safety) ratings, but still, I think that perhaps your tests by nature can give that impression.
If your tests show that the meter does not gracefully handle a lesser level of abuse than the CAT it is marked with appears to necessitate, then you have shown that it can not meet that rating.
If this means it is unsafe to use the meter within the bounds of that rating because it does not meet the requirements thereof... is a different question, but people could I think reasonably draw the conclusion, that the CAT rating printed on the meter should definitely not be used to determine the answer.
Of course, we all know this already cat ratings printed on meters from china are worth less than the ink they were printed with, but that doesn't (necessarily) mean they are unsafe or not robust enough to use in "typical" hobbiest situations. I have no hesitation in using my own collection of cheap-chinese-meters.
Anyway, I'm not sure where I was going with this now, kinda got lost along the way, in short, stick some links in your video descriptions, people might ask less repetitive questions of you then :-)