Hundreds of ICO reviews means you had to do 1 every day. Proper due diligence is a full time job, I doubt you can push them all out with quality with 1 daily. And why do so many reviews? Why not select a few based on initial criteria and then do proper reviews? Isn't basic screening part of due diligence, after all?
Edit: I just looked myself and these are not really reviews. Just a checklist, which is only one of many tools in due diligence. And you also have sponsored reviews. That's a conflict of interest. You can't have sponsored content and rate ICOs without bias.
Thank you for your input.
We do not have sponsored reviews.
We are doing initial check of the project status. It is hard to do complete due diligence for all projects because it is time consuming.
What we are doing is a setting up a tool to add facts and validate them. Those facts affect the due diligence "checklist".
We are looking for those interested in joining us and work on covering more projects and share this information with the community. We are preatty sure that there are players interested in this information. Early stage due diligence for some projects is a closed information. For instance, Red Flags are not always public on the platform because we are rechecking them before making it public.