TheFunded's Ominous Algorithm

TheFunded, a site where VC's are rated by entrepreneurs, has been around for a while and gets a lot of press in the blogosphere (it sure does piss some people off). I originally greeted the idea and supported the concept strongly. I believe it's a good thing to have transparency in this market and I looked forward to both good and bad ratings. It's good to know what people like about you and even more so what they dislike about you. As a VC or a fund you can learn from this. Feedback is always good. In general, I believe people know how to read these types of rating sites and always discount the worst and best of the ratings (hence I never really cared or worried much about potential vengeance motivated ratings). Nevertheless, after being at the number one spot on the list for one day, we were all of a sudden flagged "due to suspicious activity". You can imagine this was surprising. I had some dialog with Adeo Ressi, the founder and tried to resolve this issue. Originally, the response was the aforementioned "suspicious activity". Very recently though it became "the Algorithm". This algorithm is all-knowing now and drives what happens on the site. This article (sent to me by Ressi) adds some more flavor to this.  What's my problem now you ask? Well, we didn't try to game the system. I actually also highly doubt Fred Wilson, as mentioned in the linked article was trying to game the system. Actually, we tried to support it. We pointed entrepreneurs to the site and recommended that if they had feedback, they should give it there. Well, now of the 11 or so ratings we have, 8 I believe are considered  "suspicious" by the algorithm and have been discounted by the site (I do give the site credit though for leaving them up there). I apologize to those entrepreneurs who took the time to provide this feedback to only have it devalued on the site by "the Algorithm". I understand that measures to avoid the system being "gamed" need to be in place but somehow everything about TheFunded seems tainted due to this algorithm. The ratings seem tainted, the scores seem tainted, and even the fact that VC's invested in this makes it seem tainted. How are the VC's who invested in the company or on the advisory committee (there is supposedly one) rated on the system I wonder? I still have hope for the site though as something like this thrives on growth and a large number of reviews where you can filter out the fluff. If it continues to grow it could evolve into an interesting tool for both entrepreneurs and VC's. It unfortunately has a ways to go in my opinion and "the Algorithm" needs significant tweaking before there is true credibility for TheFunded.